1. Learning depends on the meanings we give the material 2. Learning style depends on the contents 3. Many subjects can be learned in a mix of learning styles
Don't explain to me why certain information means more to you when you're in one class versus when you're in another class does that just stem from aptitude!? And why is it that you suppose she's talking about changing my mind when no one can change my mind but me you're not going to force me no one's going to force me to believe this no one's going to compel me or manipulate me or coerce me into believing this just because I see diagrams on a screen of randomly placed people and say oh well this proves this theory so therefore it must be right no that's not that doesn't work my experience proves she's wrong
Your presentation reminds me of the Chinese proverb : Tell me and I forget , show me and I remember, involve me ,make me do, and I undestand.involvement leads to understancing is the key to learning
7:00 chase and Simon 1973 (meaning) 10:30 incorporating more than one sensory experience makes it more meaningful 12:05 learning styles do not exist 12:45 confirmation bias
Going through a TEDx marathon right now watching different videos on learning she is one of the best TEDx talkers I've watched to so far. Personally I recommened watching Learning how to learn by Barbara Oakley but I would say that she is a overall great teacher. She is very straight forward and precise with her presentation as well as her use of the presentation slides. i've seen a lot of other TED talkers who are so bad at presenting their ideas where the slides has no absolute connection to what they're teaching but she is just so great at it.
memorization of words/images/sounds is different from actual understanding. it's one thing to "learn" the countries and capitals of europe, it's another one to actually LEARN something by understanding it, like a physics concept, or math, or history, or logic...
EvilBunny "there is a difference between learning and understanding, learning is the ability to regurgitate what was spoken to you. understanding is the ability to comprehend what you have been taught and to apply that in meaningful ways."
I would even say that you should avoid memorization (unless it's for a speech or for similar reasons), and instead focus on understanding. I think tests should be about seeing if you can "apply" - as James said, understanding is the ability to apply.
All knowledge starts with the ability to recall its components. There is no way of understanding a concept if you don't know the components that understanding is made up of. So I agree that memorization isn't learning, but learning is impossible without memorization in the first place. If you were to forget how to ride the bicycle everytime you stopped cycling, you would never learn. The same goes for neurosurgeons, mma fighters, psychologists and every field imaginable.
This was an amazing TED talk. What surprises me is I've always gone out and searched for truths. I've always wanted to get proven wrong so that I can adjust my views to fit reality. I honestly thought for the longest that this was a normal human process of curiosity. That's because i grouped the people that think this way with the ones that don't. I've always told people that I learn best with all the learning styles. That it depended on what I'm learning. I've taught myself how to ride a bike, and how to play guitar and I've been learning to code recently I've been noticing that the way I'm learning certain things would vary but the one thing that stayed consistent was if I used all my senses, I always remembered it better. This makes sense because when I involved all my senses in what I was learning I become more invested meaning it meant more to me. I'm glad my psychology professor showed me this TED talk. It's opened my understanding of how I can maximize my learning.
"We are not as limited (by the learning styles) as we sometimes think we are!". This did it for me plus her reasons Why should this matter. Very good talk!
I really agree with this. Partly because I always thought the concept was kind of bullshit. I'm a good student and have a reasonable capacity for memorization, but any time I was forced to figure out my "learning style" I could not do it. Because I see the value in learning in different ways. What I think is more important for learning and building meaning is not so much the method of delivery, but how "active" you are with the material. Adding context. I also see learning style used as a cop-out by so many people. "I can't learn this way because my brain doesn't work like that". Every time someone says that to me I just want to face palm. Have you even TRIED? For all the students that say they can't learn from being lectured, I would venture to guess that the issue might have more to do with your focus and attention than actual disability. It's much easier to stay engaged with something that's in your hands, or something that looks pretty. I also think that learning to love reading from an early age can make a big difference. Many people try to avoid reading if at all possible, but it's just another method of acquiring information. That said, these are just my opinions and of course I realize I could be wrong. I have not done any research in these areas. Very interesting and provocative video.
Learning styles can be taken as a medical or some kind of drug. Just as all drugs don't cure all diseases, this kind of concepts shouldn't be expected to cure all learning problems.
this is not provocative, this is just myth debunking, provocative/thought provoking/polemic would have been to pinpoint where this comes from and why it is so popular.
I agree to some point. May i add, at the same time it took the teacher, the tutor, the lecture to make it interesting. I always believe in Focus and Revision. During my Uni years i cursed some of my Uni friends who don't even take notes and yet they excel. They said "learn smart, not hard", i just wish they are in my shoes..
A). Tesia Marshik used the 1973 study of "Chase and Simon" to demonstrate that learning styles or preferences do not enhance learning. We can learn through connecting our experiences or by using our experiences to gain knowledge, according to the study she explains, and most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning. As an example, they compare the abilities of an expert and beginner chessboard player and find that the expert has a significant advantage in remembering the position shown in the first photo because they understand the game's meaning, strategy, and have experience playing chessboard, which makes it easier for them to remember the positions. However, those advantages are useless because the pieces of chess are randomly arranged shown in the second photo, making it difficult for them to remember the positions because the position is not meaningful. She explained that our sensory or learning preferences or styles are not enough for us to learn or gain knowledge. It's about how we use our senses, learning preferences, and learning styles to connect ourselves or our own experiences, or to allow others to experience things to better understand things. B). Three ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning according to Tesia Marshik. First, we store information in terms of meaning. I've realized like she did, that we didn't understand a certain topic, term, or word by simply reading it, memorizing it, or reading it numerous times unless we understand its meaning and relate it to our own experiences or situations to comprehend/understand its context. It's somehow true that most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning. Next, the best way to learn something depends on the content itself. Just, for example, we want to distinguish the differences in the smell of flowers we saw in the book. The best way for us to learn the differences of the flowers is by letting ourselves smell different flowers to understand their differences. It helps us to learn or understand things, depends on the content, and some sensory assists in learning. An example of this is listening to different sounds to understand the meaning or smelling things to recognize their difference. Last is using multiple senses. For example, we would like to learn specific sports such as basketball. Allowing ourselves to play basketball is the best way for us to learn, but we can also learn by watching others play the game and observing their technique and moves, as well as hearing or listening to other people's suggestions on how to play the game, and then applying all of that knowledge to our own learning.
I was always confused by the different types of learners because I could never really learn well using any one of the types of learning styles. I only do quite well when I practice things over and over again and I always need a lot of time to recall a lot of information.
She presents valid points and research to her point that everyone learns through a variety of their senses, and that the mode of learning depends on the content. However, contrary to her point, most people prefer a specific content which is tied to a specific sense. For example, music is auditory and it comes to some people more naturally. Some are able to detect melodies, harmonies, and finer details in music better than others--even without training. Other people prefer and excel at visual arts and have a "keen eye" for visual details. So, granted, we all listen to music through our "auditory" sense and we all create visual art with our "visual" sense, people still do have content preferences based on sensory strengths.
If you'll listen again to the first few minutes of her talk you'll hear her specifically state that we do have preferences for how we learn; it just doesn't produce a significantly different learning outcome.
I understand her point, but in both ways whether I just (prefer) visual learning or believed that my (style) of learning is visual, I still want my teacher to have some images or slides... NOT only listening to her speaking, and I still want to buy colorful book over a plain book that doesn't have any images !! it doesn't matter if its a learning style or preference because the result is the same for me... it makes me more comfortable and easier to learn. + I believe that teachers will have better results with their students if they put in mind the 5 senses in general.
Yes, you are right but I think that the teacher's role is the biggest. Because if they have the talent to do this job, you will understand it. There are more important ones: context, teacher's role, to experience more. When you listen and see something it becomes more meaningful not about your learning style. She wants to tell us it is not about learning style, it is about authenticity.
She literally stated in the video at around 8:27 when she stated: The best way to teach about song birds is to show an image of a songbird or to see real songbirds if possible. People learn through experience and the experience depends on the context and content. The fact that learning styles don't exist does not mean that teachers are going to just talk. We understand the brain better, we understand that the brain retains information in sensory memory that is meaningful or has an emotional response attached. It is better to learn through hands-on experiential learning activities and projects. EVERYONE learns this way. There is no learning style, there are no "math people",... our brains are all designed the same way to learn. Our experiences, our passions and interests, and our prior knowledge, all these things lend themselves to how students learn best.
A. ) Tesia Marshik used the study of "Chase and Simon" as her reference that learning styles or preferences do not enhance learning. Because we are learning through our experiences. She explained that we store information in terms of meaning and not connected to our sensory mode. And it is about how we use our senses, learning preferences, and learning styles to connect on our own experiences, and allow us to gain more experiences to have knowledge on it or understand things. B. ) 3 ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning according to Tesia Marshik. 1. First, we store information in terms of meaning. 2. Second, the best way to learn something depends on the content itself. 3. Third, many things can be taught or learned using multiple senses.
It's not about matching learning style with teaching style, but it's about 'integrating' preferred and non-preferred (dominant and non-dominant) styles in a way that slightly challenges the learners. That's all.
Yeah I lean towards the learning style not being the key to a learner learning, but another tool to keep the learner engaged in the content and process.
Yes!!! Absolutely- working with kids of all ages as a BCBA i cannot stress enough the importance of using preferred and non preferred in teaching while integrating their learning styles!
VARK or the Visual, Auditory, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic model is not completely wrong! Just that, as teachers we need to blend these ways to make best of the understanding possible for different concepts/topics.
Cool video! I have to agree to this to a great extend, but I have to also mention: More often than not, just because some of the new theories are correct it doesn't mean we should dismiss everything in the older theories. Even new theories that seems accurate now are also sometimes just a bridge towards future newer theories. E.g. we though that it was smart to figure out the earth is actually round instead of flat, then someone said the earth is not really perfectly round, then someone would venture further about other answers in quantum physics and other new fields of theories that change everything again... I have never really believe that learning styles are very accurate or conclusive, it have always been more like something to help us, plus even many of these theorists had often suggested to tap on multiple senses (as the speaker suggested too) instead of concentrating too much on one type - which is why although I have heard that many people are 'visual learners', a lecture with nothing else except a powerpoint slides show for hours would still be frowned upon nowadays. Moreover we have always known that there are many factors other than learning styles which affect learning retention. I will be happy if the industry would agree with the speaker that it is not effective to spend too much time/resources to analyse into individuals' learning styles, and we can concentrate more on the contents and other critical factors of learning.
I think this presentation may be addressing a bit of a straw man argument when it comes to learning styles. While one’s learning preferences may not impact information retention in controlled experiments, they probably do impact one’s motivation and energy level to learn, both of which are as important as raw information intake to the process of creating meaning. I’m not an expert on learning styles. But just as a brief experiment, I Googled “learning styles” and “motivation.” The first study that came up showed a correlation between visual learning style and motivation toward pursuing higher education. That certainly doesn’t prove anything. But it does demonstrate that perhaps the importance of understanding learning styles (or learning preferences, if you will) might not be in raw information intake but rather in how one’s preferences affect one’s ability to stick with and master a subject over the long term.
@Ceol It's true in my experience that I can learn in any way. However, it takes me much less time to complete the study material in my preferred way of learning, as it comes very naturally to me. If I try to learn in other ways, it makes it becomes very time-consuming and boring.
There is no best way to learn something. Learning is learning. If something is presented in a non-convoluted way and the student is motivated and determined to learn the student will learn. Some will learn quicker and more deeply than others however all that means is that human beings are diverse.
A student's motivation is very important for learning anything. Set your goals clearly and then start learning materials that will get you to your goal. Focus and absorption of information should be high then. A teacher can't determine someone's life goals for them and therefore can't determine his/her level of motivation. "Styles" or "learning strategies" all have secondary importance in this matter.
+Drazen Zovic After nearly 40 years of Teaching I have that motivation isn't just important. It's much bigger than that in my view. Show me the neuroscience for learning styles somebody please or shut the front door!
I do agree. My problem is with Headteachers who are adamant that Specific Learning Styles exist and they also try to quantify the learning styles of each student numerically. It does complicate learning and it's Bad Science or nonsense at best.
@@stephenobrien2952 Strongly disagree. If I take piano lessons and you have the same boring Hanon book you're intent on forcing on all your students, I quit. Show me a Journey song, verbatim to the record and I'll have a good part of it by next week (fairly high skill level) IF I get basic reading skills and a walk-through. Motivation and pertinence is EVERYTHING.
I found it pretty believable when I first heard about learning styles. Years went by, and never questioned it. As soon as I started hearing about the opposing viewpoint, I found that believable as well- more so when I started considering the number of people who stand to make a buck off of the idea. I'm no scientist, I never read any studies on it, but my belief is that while we all learn in different ways and while some people might be a little more or a little less able to understand something based on the manner in which it's presented, it's probably not so extreme as to justify all the labels. Good teaching addresses a subject in a variety of different ways anyway. Discard all the nonsense and just get down to it.
This is the first time I been exposed to this concept...my interest was generated to seek this video out because I met an instructor at SFSU who specializes in Critically Reflective Intelligence teaching. I am reading an article entitled The Getting of Wisdom: What Critically Reflective Teaching is and Why it is importnat by Stephen Brookfield (1995) . It brings up critical, casual, and perscriptive assumptions we make about how things "should be happening" withing ourselve and the world because they relflect our inner thinking process/thoughts. That is faulty in many ways.
Interesting comment, but I can't pretend I understand what you are trying to say (I can certainly guess but I think it is better to clarify). Would you care to elaborate more please? For example, what are your thoughts about what are mentioned in this video in relation to your current interest and study in critical reflective teaching? What is the exact thing that you are referring to as faulty?
I suggest, providing multiple ways to access the information will benefit all learners. So it probably doesn't really matter if there's a "style' or not.... we need to cater to all learners....
no, we not need cater all learner. we need to make sure a particulat content is best learned in what mode. so, it's content-oriented instead of learning-style oriented (which is psedoscientific).
Yes. I'm not suggesting learning styles. We need multiple content based exposures, including explicit instruction, images, examples-and-non examples, different contexts, comparing and contrasting, morphology etc. to increase depth of understanding.
I must admit that I am somewhat resistant to this notion in the sense that people have variations in their ability to process sensory information. We wouldn’t use visuals to teach something to someone who is blind, or audio to teach something to someone who is def. Individuals process sensory information differently, and this subsequently impacts how they recall information. Additionally, learning isn’t necessarily limited to our ability to recall specific information, there is also an element of learning that speaks to insight, critical thought, and experience. I would argue that understanding one’s dominant senses remains an important component of understanding how to approach teaching that individual (See Helen Keller). I would also argue that intelligence takes many forms, and is not limited to one’s ability to immediately recall a list words or images or a random arrangement of chess pieces. I agree that appealing to multiple senses is an important component of learning, and that deriving meaning is an essential element. I also see the problem of people potentially closing themselves off from information simply because it does not appeal to their self-identified dominant sense. But because individuals are the chief executive of their own operating systems, it is important to listen to their input and make an effort to tailor approaches to their teaching to increase efficacy of learning. Forging a network of neural pathways that stem from various sensory processing centers of the brain may help one derive meaning and thus store and access information more easily. Some individuals visualize an object when given a verbal prompt, and some individuals can replay entire concerts when given a verbal prompt (such as the name of their favorite music artist). Perhaps “learning styles” is a misnomer, and “dominant sensory processing style” would be a better way to refer to the variation in individuals’ ability to process and recall information.
I agree with so much that you say. You say ¨it is important to listen to their input and make an effort to tailor approaches to their teaching to to increase efficacy of learning¨. I think the most important thing is to help them examine different strategies so that they can make the learning choices that best serve them in the moment. Also, I have different preferences in different moments. Sometimes a sense can get in the way of me completing a task. For example, if I need to unlock a door in the dark, it can help me to close my eyes. This also helps me if I need to play a piano piece by memory. And, if I have a piece memorized, having the music in front of me confuses me. Perhaps I just don´t have the skill to be able to make sense of it yet. So, it isn´t about rigid learning styles, but all about one´s needs and goals in a particular moment in their learning journey. Also, I would say that their are times when a strategy that seems more difficult in the moment might be the best choice according to our goals. The idea of rigid learning styles might get in the way of us taking advantage of this. That is also something to help students examine.
I bombed a job interview many years ago because I had the audacity to question the interviewer's conception of learning styles. I wish this video was around then!
Learning styles always helped me to believe that I was outstanding in that I had no particular learning style. I had assumed that since it was invested in, that there might be definite merit to the origin of the theory, but not necessarily indicating that it was a truth. This did help to create the idea in my head that because of the infinite diversity of humanity, that there was inherently a possibility that i could be not only apt at benefitting from multiple of these styles, that i could benefit from them all. Much like she mentioned in the presentation, there could be deficit in limiting yourself to one learning style because of a perceived limitation to one, I often think that when addressed as a whole, with one being extra beneficial (relating to interest base memory) that learning Via a personal preference could benefit the learning experience. as in the difference between learning and education. you can easily learn through multiple platforms, or styles, but you may tend to create internal associations to the material when applied through a preferred 'learning style'. This leaves credence to the initial understanding of how learning styles came to be and also how they can simultaneously be useless. Though I don't believe the intent of this presentation was to say that there was no foundation or merit to the concept, just that the concept has been so widely adopted that it became less of a tool with applications and more of a rule. -end rant
Learning styles or preferences cannot be referred to students only. For me, it can be practitioners tools in order to facilitate comprehensible input or scaffold students to their zone of proximal development considering their learning preferences- the so-called learning styles. Whether it is students' learning styles or teachers' teaching styles, the focal point is enhancing learning. I do believe it is meaningful to expose students into various channel of input. When we enter into students threshold through their preferences, they let the "input" to get in the process of becoming "intake".
I read about this in Dr. Sousa's textbooks at SDSU while pursuing my teaching credential. Learning is definitely linked to our emotions and only possible if the student feels the teacher genuinely cares for him/ her.
I'm agree with her, I'm French teacher, and l discover it every day , the learner's styles is very sophisticated, I must take account all 3 styles in same situation-problem
The number of people in the comments saying that PhD professor doesn't understand the research (or lack thereof) behind "learning styles" is astounding.
I do grasp the idea, but there were some things that I feel are a bit inconsistent. I think that 'preferred learning style' is not the same as 'preferred teaching style'. 'Learning style' is not about the way you present the material to students. It's about how they learn it best. If a teacher wants his students to learn how a sparrow looks like, of course he'll show them a picture of it, because that's the easiest and quickest way for him to convey that piece of knowledge. It would be less effective and more time-consuming to do it another way. That is a teaching method, though, used mainly to present the idea. However, I feel that the real question here is how are the students going to practice and remember that information. And that would refer to the way they learn best and in the most effective way for them. Are they going to sit with a picture and look at it just as the teacher asked them to do in class? Are they going to draw a bird themselves or print a picture and colour it? Maybe, as it was mentioned in the lecture, they have better auditory memories and they would memorize it more easily if they described it out loud instead of just looking at the picture silently? Or if they described it by writing it down, because they have better memories of things they note down? Doesn't 'having better auditory/visual/tactile memories' prompt us to study in a certain way, because it's the easiest and most effective for us?
There is a tremendous about of pressure on teachers to conform to the latests fads. When students are confronted with new learning they now say, well you don't teach in my learning style so I can't get it. It takes a long time to get through that belief. What I keep in mind is knowing where students are and working from there. What "categories" do they have already and which ones will be uncomfortable to establish when new ideas are introduced. These categories help create meaning. ( The idea we someone is an olfactory is a category of "absurd" so we can begin to reorganize where we put information). In my view, part of the push for fads is to promote a book. A more sinister thought is that fads are intended to dismantle public confidence in public education so for profit organizations can come in to "save the day". In the meantime, I will continue to teach according to what I know works according to research.
I find it easier to learn with how we desire, it makes learning more easy because it makes it feel like i'm not working. it brings more ease and joy of working towards your goal and progressing. This video was life changing
I think it's silly that we have so many academics trying to disprove something that really is simple to understand and in simplicity makes it easier for people to conceptualise how to improve learning experiences! I agree that we don't have 'set' learning styles, in fact we each learn across all means, and learning is context-specific therefore we have 'preferred learning styles' to the experience/context we are in, in which we can store memory either visually, auditorly etc etc The idea of specific styles is good to help people process information! 'the key is preferred learning styles exist'
Based from experience as a student and as a teacher, I'd rather conclude that 'there are two sides of the coin". Thus, I agree at one point, and I also disagree on the other hand. I agree that learning is best elicited when the learner finds it meaningful. But it is also undeniably true that we are diversed species, thus, we vary in strength and weaknesses. A concrete context would be the strength of man vs. that of a woman. They are quite distinctive except perhaps for some exceptional cases. Studies on Learning Styles were actually developed to help and support students who were considered 'less achievers' as evaluated by Aptitude or IQ Standards. Abilities to perceive meaning may differ from one student to another. And personal preferences could play a keyrole in one's perception of meaning, thus, learning style may not be totally a myth. On one hand, I do agree that placing great emphasis on learning styles may also be debilitating other higher order skills. I personally believe that learning styles doesn't really create 'impact' on learning per se (for average learners). THANKS FOR SUCH AN ENLIGHTENING VIDEO.
Great comment, insightful note on the less achievers and why learning styles were developed. I'm interested in learning more about that and the origins of these ideas. Do you maybe have the names and year of the researchers that did these studies?
I totally agree with the contents of the video but I just wanted to say that I do not think that this concept is actually wasting any of our education resources. Mainly because these methods help you to remember your lessons. And sadly still mostly students are not tested if they understand the lessons rather they are still tested on the basis of their memory. And I feel that this is also one of the reasons why the idea of different learning styles still persists and it will persist as long as the current situations do not change.
Hola Comparto tu opinión, en algún momento de mi vida pensé que aprendía de diferentes formas, pero todos te dicen....es imposible. Ahora que te escucho entiendo que era cierto. De verdad es, que la gente no quiere pensar en cambios, se quedan en el lado cómodo, en donde ya les resolvieron sus dudas antes y no hay nada más. Te felicito.
A child coming from a domestic and social setting with a myriad exposure to situations of behavior change attends a class programmed to just a typical mode of learning and finds himself or herself baffled by the way content just because only a bit of learning habit is featured and we call it teaching to the learning styles! The world doesn't give us information in just one method, rather we gather it through a variety of means. Unless the lesson makes any sense,we shut out our brain. What a beautiful presentation and convincing too.
She is just matching learning to the way some teachers are teaching. She is also playing with vocabulary. Background knowledge is important to teaching. Is this teacher thinking teachers do not teach background knowledge. It is as if she thinks people use "learning styles" as the end of all ends. Good teachers also take into account what they are teaching. So her criticism is only valid if a teacher uses the idea of learning styles as the WAY to teach rather than a tool in our backpack. When I taught in Saudi Arabia the women really PREFERRED auditory learning. When teaching I could accelerate the students learning, but incorporating activities that used this awareness. However, I also worked on making students more aware of the visual activities. I taught students skills to help them learn more visually. Good teachers instruct using all modalities. This will benefit ALL students like kids with disabilities (i.e. deaf students, blind students) and also help students from various backgrounds.
And that is why I've always found it hard to answer that question myself - What is your learning style? - mostly because I have no preference or pre-ordained style. What works best for the moment works best for me too. That and I hate labels!
Great presentation! Clear and concise. Well-reasoned. Other people are saying this same thing about learning styles -- at least that the visual/auditory/kinaesthetic learning styles theory is overwhelmingly not supported by research. I am starting to believe that learning styles do not mean much. We learn and remember things based much more on meaning.
A. There are many ways to test the study about the misconception of learning styles, but according to Tesia Marshik, one basic design in testing this is by bringing in a bunch of different people - almost like a survey - with different learning styles, teach them in a variety of ways according to their supposed preferred learning styles, and then see if teaching them in one way was somehow better for them or more effective than the others. As an example, she had a list of words she wanted them to memorize and in one group she presented only the list of words, one group got the presented images of similar words, and lastly, one group got the sounds of the same words. Through this, they expected that by the end of the study, at least one of those three groups with different learning styles will recall more words than the other. But they all turned out to be exactly the same; regardless of how the material was presented to them. B. According to Tesia Marshik, the three (3) actual ways we retain information or enhance learning is 1) most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning and is not tied to one particular sense or sensory mode, 2) the best way to learn (or teach) something depends on the content itself and what is possibly the best way to teach it, and 3) many things can be taught/learned using multiple senses; implying that incorporating multiple sensory experiences makes learning more meaningful.
Honestly, even as a teacher who was trained about Learning Styles, and did for a time think that the notion was valid, I totally agree with what was said here. I have two comments, however: 1. I don't think that most teachers have time to personalize their lesson plans for each individual learning style. So while I agree it is a waste of time for them to be doing so, I don't think it should be a concern. 2. The whole time I was listening, I kept waiting for her to address the fact that even if learning styles are legitimate, the point of the discussion at all is so that teachers consider the fact that variety in instructional method is vital to the successful transference of information from teacher to student. If I stand and lecture for two hours, who cares if you're an auditory learner, you are going to fall asleep. The keen educator has to be aware that to engage students and keep them actively participating in a lesson, they need to vary the methods of instruction (group activity, role-playing, etc.). I think Howard Gardner's work on Multiple Intelligences may be more palatable, in that he supposes that we all have a varying level of intelligence in the different intelligences (logical, spatial, etc.), but the point is that we all learn a certain amount in all of the different intelligences. As an educator, we have to be willing and prepared to satisfy them all.
I think your first point is partly correct. Teachers don't often actually personalise their lessons for learning styles but the is spent on evaluating learning styles and money is spent on tests. It is also a significant part of teacher training and PD and performance evaluations. Regarding MI, it has all of the same problems as learning styles. It is popular and sticks around as people feel that it must be right and like the idea of it, although there is no evidence.
A). Tesia Marshik used the study of "Chase and Simon" to demonstrate that learning styles or preferences do not enhance learning. We can learn through our experiences by using our experiences to gain knowledge, according to the study she explains, and most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning. 3 ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning according to Tesia Marshik. 1st . First, we store information in terms of meaning. 2nd, the best way to learn something depends on the content itself. 3rd Many things can be taught or learned using multiple senses.
In language learning, for example, the affective factor is VERY important to the process. So if an adult learner feels it is important to know the rules, even though research shows otherwise, then the teacher should go ahead and teach the rules. Also, even though you think people may not be auditory learners, in language learning the folks who "hear" sounds well, typically speak sooner. So in this case, as a teacher, I recognize that students have strengths and weakness in the language skill domain (may not be in the small learning style domain e.g. extroverts usually have more practice using the language than introverts). Then I can add to my classroom teaching diversity to meet the unique needs of the student.
Aprendí que no tenemos un estilo de aprendizaje particular, que podemos aprender de muchas maneras. Lo que determina que yo aprenda no es un ''estilo de aprendizaje'' sino el sentido que tenga para mi lo que estoy aprendiendo, valga la redundancia. ( Excelente argumento el de los jugadores de ajedrez, por eso creo que es razonable saber eso)
I would agree with her but I am definitely a visual learner. To prove this I just listened to this entire speech and I have no idea what this was about. Other than the part where she explains every detail about how we learn through experiences and what things relate and mean to us. Oh yeah, and how we tend to search for things that confirm our narrow minded beliefs about ourselves because change is scary. Wow, I guess I did learn something by listening. Thank you!! 😊🙌
@@dans2971 how do you know I totally were learned by watching and listening and looking and doing things so I'm more kinesthetic and a visual learner but I have a hard time understanding anything if I was just listening to it okay you speak for yourself please
Im a visual too i think but maybe an spatial imagery learner like creating 3d object in my mind while listening and I also prefer learning by looking on them
She literally said there are no evidences that preferential learning works (visual, audio, olfactory, etc), and yet you agreed with her and that you are a visual learner. She is right, people just don’t want to be wrong.
this was an amazing video.first, I wasn't convinced by the idea ,but when I gave her an obortunity I got her point.then,I think that she is right, we should not waste our potentials as well as abilities ,yet we should vary and expand while learning :)
As a part of my class assignment i watched this video. I found it very interesting and partial holding some truth. The only part i disagreed with is letting science be the determining factor of whats real. Science can only process to a certain level, but lacks the ability to deep dipper and go higher. 🙏🏾
she is right, it really makes no difference what type of stimulus you get, if you see or hear the word dog you still picture the dog in your head. the way we differ in learning really is the way we encode information once it's in the brain. this can be easily improved with associations and meaningful encoding of stimulus. that's how you learn better.
While there are "preferred" ways to learn for many people, I think the speaker's statement towards the end (and I paraphrase) that "incorporating multiple sensory experiences into one lesson makes it more meaningful for all students" is the important takeaway. In teaching music for 30+ years, I have always tried to infuse my lessons with as many different sensory experiences as possible. It just always seemed to make sense that by using the tactile, auditory, visual, and kinesthetic senses together in the same lesson not only would touch upon students' individual preferences but also engage them with learning in multiple ways, thus giving them a better opportunity to actually perform and learn the concepts I was trying to teach them. One example of this is teaching students a folk dance. Breaking down the steps and practicing short phrases (kinesthetic), looking at a diagram of the choreography (visual), listening for the musical form of the piece and being aware of the A and B sections (etc.), and singing the lyrics (if there are lyrics to the dance) then combining these activities in various ways- have proven to me that students will be overall much more successful in the end. Elementary music teachers have taught this way for a long time.
This might be applicable to adults to some extent but I can attest to kids having different learning styles. Little kids enjoy crafts and learning through play because they get to touch and feel things. People generally have more than one style of learning but one is stronger. I have three kids who I homeschool and they all learn differently. I started teaching them reading at about the same age and I quickly discovered that the teaching style that worked for one was not working for the next one because they learn differently.
Anecdotal accounts don’t mean anything. She is citing empirical and scientific research. You’re entitled to your opinion but you may want to expand your scope past your own home.
@@C4LLM3G0D159 until you listen to the opposing scientific and empirical data that supports learning styles. That’s the beauty of science. There’s always data to support the opposite side.
I would like to paraphrase Guy Claxton that it does not matter what you see, it is important what you are looking for, not what you know, it is what you want to learn. I think this could fit into what Dr. Marshik is talking about. I think this idea should be spread more aggressively. Thank you, Dr. Marshik.
For lists and short term objectives I see how those tests can apply, but for a concept its very difficult to say that there aren't learning styles. Lets say a teen is taking Algebra and the classes is studying Logarithms. Some of the kids in the class will understand the concept after writing down the notes from the board, while other kids won't understand it all until they practice with them and apply them in problems. I've been interning at high school for two years and I believe that what your say can apply in very specific situation, but there are different types of learning styles for sure.
A. Tesia Marshik said, the key is when put to the test, these learning styles don’t exist, and it doesn’t make a difference. Now I will say that when we survey people, many people say they have preferences. So if I asked you, “How would you like to learn something?” or “How would you like to study?”, many of you might say, “I’d prefer to see it,” or “I’d prefer to hear it,” or “I’d prefer to actually do it.” So that’s true. People have a preference but those preferences don’t actually enhance your learning when we test them in experimental conditions. And there are many different ways to test this, but the basic design is this: We bring in a bunch of different people who have supposedly different learning styles. We teach them in a variety of ways. And then we see if teaching them in one way somehow was better for them or more effective than others. B. The three ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning, according to Tesia Marshik 1. Most of what you learn is stored in terms of meaning. In order to retain information, we have to organize it in a way that’s meaningful. 2. The best way to learn (or teach) something really depends on what it is you want to learn. It depends on the content itself. 3. Many things can be taught/ learned using multiple senses.
A. There is no particular study, but there have been several meta-analysis papers where in all of them have concluded that same thing that there is still no evidence that the matching styles to supposed learning styles or the students preferences actually makes a difference. B. According to Tesia Marshik the three ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning is the Meaning, Content and the Multiple Senses.
muy bueno el video muchas gracias. En resumen no debe de ser de importancia la forma de estilo que se lleve acabo el aprendizaje, en realidad sino la disposición y el interés que le pongas., como tener buena actitud positiva, darle la importancia ,disponibilidad, no rendirse ,no dejar de intentarlo sin importar la forma en que te quieran transmitir el conocimiento y así ser innovadores aun mundo que avanza y avanza .
I'm a homeschool mom of 4 and I discovered at an early age for my two oldest boys, that a way of learning, I call it a "processing style", made memorization almost magically easier for them. I developed a test when they were ages 4 and 6, presenting a question that was beyond their current grade level, to each boy separately. I found that with very little repetition, as in one time, they could tell me the answer to the quiz or question and it was one particular style of learning. For one of my boys or was auditory and one it was tactile. I have a theory though, being that probably all the test subjects have been adults who have been saturated in a strictly visual/auditory education system, that their brains have learned to learn in the way they've had to, but that they're actually wiref fairly strongly for a primary learning style. I continue to see rapid growth with my kids, having been able to tailor their learning to what works best for them. I say it's absolutely true that people have a learning style and that they would learn much better and faster if taught from a young age to work with it.
learning a subject is not same with memorization of a list and call the information back from long term memory. As the bloom taxonomy indicates, there are many levels such as comprehension, application, analysis,synthesis and creation as well as knwoing and remembering. Remembering the concepts is the most primitive level of learning and it is acttulay not counted as learning as well in terms of many learning theories such as cognitive theories, .constructivism.. Those memorization of lists experiments actually measure the differences in terms of memorization styles rather than learning preferences, I think. . it is very early to say that there is no learning style by a such overconfidence, even there are many researches, models, theories on this subject. Lastly just ı said memorization of a list or remembering the items indicated memorization preferences or the learning strategies rather than learning itself....
Well, there is no evidence that learning styles exists so far. While remembering is the lowest level of Bloom's Taxonomy, it is foundational for the higher levels.
still, memorization is a necessary step and the most adequate to study first. You can't study "learning" as a whole, that's just not how cognitive science works, you've got to break it down and simpler more primal functions. Her argument is still valid though, because what she's talking about is a myth about perceptual learning
Yes it is foundational but the whole cannot be reduced into its smaller parts, you cant say there is no EVIDENCE you can't disregard all the articles so far supporting learning styles just by saying there is no evidence it is something like proposing flat earth theory they also say there is no evidence for a spherical earth model
well if she is talking about a myth about memorization or perceptual learning she shoul emphasize those words.. there are many learning styles theories and models and you cant just skip it by saying no evidence exist it is like there is no evidence for speherical earth model or we cant see any evidence of the notion of economy in the bazaar or saying like there is no evidence for intelligence in the brain because brain scannings don't give any concrete photo of intelligence in the brain
I think she defines what she's talking about well enough throughout the video (I got what she meant and I was watching th same thing as you), but then that's just a matter of opinion. Nevertheless, there are no serious scientific papers out there supporting learning styles (the definition of learning styles we agreed upon and the one she states, not the existence of inter individual differences in perceptual acuity and comprehension ease), so she doesn't have to discard "all the evidence", there ain't actually any (that's why we use the word "myth" in that case). Here she's not just "skipping it because no evidence exists" (which would be reason enough to doubt any such theory), she's debunking it because of all the evidence against it. It might be hard for one to be convinced by such a small talk that summarizes the ideas and the research VERY quickly, that much I understand. But then if you want to go further into the subject it is your job to exercise your critical mind and to examine references that would go both ways: look for research defending learning styles theory, look for research debunking it (you can begin with the ones she quotes), and make your own idea about it, but don't limit yourself to thinking that she's "just skipping it because no evidence exists", thats just not true from my point of view and it really look like you're just validating your own primary bias towards that subject.
Thank you for a wonderfully provocative talk that changes a framework I've lived with for a long time! Meaning, and I would add that student choice is an important part of meaning making.
I can read something five times and not understand how to put it together or fix it. I can have someone show me once and get it almost always right away.
I always failed in school. By coincidence I found a book about learning styles, they described me to the detail! And after I started to apply their advice, I became a very good student, I was a bad one all my life! And if this woman puts me in a field to learn to play football, I might through the ball on her head! Because I hate to learn that way! The same way I hated gym. Or if they make me just listening to somebody... I could fall asleep 2 minutes later! I had a Literature teacher, you could tell, he knew a lot, he never read anything, all was in his memory. The only problem, I would wake up when the school bell rang... never knew what he taught! So, I don´t believe a word of what she says! I am living proof that knowing yourself it helps you improve a lot! Or, are we built in series??? I thought we were different individuals...
+Jackie Levaggi I think you have missed the point of the talk. This reminds me of the discussions about multi-tasking, and how science has shown without a shadow of a doubt that NOBODY can multi-task effectively - our brains are not made for it. But then ... there's always somebody who says, "Yes but.. I am different. I CAN multitask, and I know it." And this is why people text and drive. They just don't listen.
Mark Smith Yeah! Your science has the answer for everything! They know things for a fact Specially psychiatry, psychology and all the ones related to them! No wonder why there are so many theories and so little proof to the point that they can not even detect for a fact, for example, at an early age, a psychotic person who later in life will be a mass or series killer! And everyday they make new theories!!! And new crazy people shows up massacring human beings... Yeah! You and your truth!!! The only exception is brain science... which is pretty new and not all scientists can agree with all the facts or tests that show "apparent" facts. We are not talking here about exact sciences! Even though if they result to be exact, they are still in diapers! But if you think you are right, you are...
Its very funny reading all these comments. People saying they are teachers and it worked for them...CONFIRMATION BIAS. She literally went over that in the talk! People are acting like this is her idea and its just her opinion. She is simply presenting evidence from a plethora of studies that have taken place on the subject. She didn't just wake up and think you know what I'm gonna rail against learning styles because I think its wrong; She did the research and drew a logical path to a sound conclusion.
There's a lot of nitpicky comments about memorization vs. learning, but I think this is mostly the defensiveness she mentioned. I thought the talk was well done and gave very good examples AND anticipated the arguments of the audience. Plus, in the end it talked about real-world applications. Well done!
So on the official course selection software for the TDSB there is also a bunch of personality quizzes. After being pressured by guidance I took the learning styles quiz. What happened? I got a perfect one-third split between audiory, visual, and kinesthetic. I hated that quiz. The questions very obviously telegraphed their intent to the reader. For example: "Which is your favorite art subject: Visual arts, music, or drama?" Instantly I knew that choosing music would class me as auditory, visual arts as visual, and drama as kinesthetic. What if I learn music theory through pictures? And isn't art class kinesthetic when you make a drawing? And what if you listen to a play in drama class? "If you are with a group of strangers at a party, what would be best for you to remember everyone?" A. Everyone wears a name tag B. Everyone says their name C. Everyone does an icebreaker What does that even mean? "You picked name tag, therefore you are a visual learner. You wanted an icebreaker, therefore you are kinestetic." Makes no sense. Makes none whatsoever.
But the meaning is always accompanied by the referent and the signifier because these three aspects are part of the sign. That's why I think we can´t learn just in terms of meaning. In any case, we learn in terms of signs.
I feel gaslit by the section where she basically said "if you disagree with me it's your confirmation bias". I don't care whether learning styles are real or not, but the idea that teachers need to vary their teaching style to keep students engaged and help everyone in the room learn seems like a good idea to me. I always just assumed I had a mixed learning style. Turns out I just like to be kept interested, and for me, telling teachers they don't need to engage with students auditorily, visually, and kinaesthetically is just going to set us back years to teachers giving dry lectures, or copying out of textbooks. All the things that take the fun out of learning.
I think you should reflect on the meaning of 'learning'. It is not a synonym for 'memorizing', thus the research you are using can't disclaim the existence of ALL learning style theories, because they are not all about memorizing. There are MANY theories out there. They are only tools to help understand and support one's uniqueness in a moment in time, and NOT to be used as permanent labels. To add to the irony, you've talked about the Garner's Theory of Multiple Intelligence trying to debunk learning styles. And by the way, teacher really do have to learn about the uniqueness of the individual learning process, otherwise they would unconsciously use mostly their own preferred learning strategy. I think what you are trying to say is not that they do not exist, but they are misinterpreted and misused and that I agree on. I hope you focus in the next presentation less on why others are wrong and you are right, and more on meaningful content.
Perhaps you should go and look at the studies she referenced, as she asked, and see if they are all about memorizing. I agree that teachers should teach a variety of learning strategies, but not talk about learning styles at all, because they are so misinterpreted. I think her talk was very meaningful. When she talked about confirmation bias, that is something all humans suffer from.
What I think is ironic is that you've made a point of saying that teachers need to use learning style theory because otherwise they would be doing a bad job BECAUSE of learning style theory (quote : "they would unconsciously use mostly their own preferred learning strategy". Why would they have a own preferred learning strategy ? Because they would believe wrong facts about learning and there being better strategies than others, i.e. because of a learning style theory)
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
1. Learning depends on the meanings we give the material 2. Learning style depends on the contents 3. Many subjects can be learned in a mix of learning styles
Don't explain to me why certain information means more to you when you're in one class versus when you're in another class does that just stem from aptitude!? And why is it that you suppose she's talking about changing my mind when no one can change my mind but me you're not going to force me no one's going to force me to believe this no one's going to compel me or manipulate me or coerce me into believing this just because I see diagrams on a screen of randomly placed people and say oh well this proves this theory so therefore it must be right no that's not that doesn't work my experience proves she's wrong
@@jasonpelerine7817 Read the research. That should convince you, and if it doesn’t, you’re the equivalent of a flat-earther.
@@jasonpelerine7817 entitled.
Thanks for thia
Thank you.
Who else is watching this video for a college class?
LA FILM
Me
@@DeadLucked SAME!!!
Yhup
✋🏾 me lol also for LAFS
Your presentation reminds me of the Chinese proverb : Tell me and I forget , show me and I remember, involve me ,make me do, and I undestand.involvement leads to understancing is the key to learning
Except that has been debunked too.
That is an awfully long proverb.
❤
7:00 chase and Simon 1973 (meaning)
10:30 incorporating more than one sensory experience makes it more meaningful
12:05 learning styles do not exist
12:45 confirmation bias
The idea that we learn what we need to learn by seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling, doing it, is stellar.
Going through a TEDx marathon right now watching different videos on learning she is one of the best TEDx talkers I've watched to so far. Personally I recommened watching Learning how to learn by Barbara Oakley but I would say that she is a overall great teacher. She is very straight forward and precise with her presentation as well as her use of the presentation slides. i've seen a lot of other TED talkers who are so bad at presenting their ideas where the slides has no absolute connection to what they're teaching but she is just so great at it.
cool
memorization of words/images/sounds is different from actual understanding. it's one thing to "learn" the countries and capitals of europe, it's another one to actually LEARN something by understanding it, like a physics concept, or math, or history, or logic...
EvilBunny "there is a difference between learning and understanding, learning is the ability to regurgitate what was spoken to you. understanding is the ability to comprehend what you have been taught and to apply that in meaningful ways."
+
I would even say that you should avoid memorization (unless it's for a speech or for similar reasons), and instead focus on understanding. I think tests should be about seeing if you can "apply" - as James said, understanding is the ability to apply.
All knowledge starts with the ability to recall its components. There is no way of understanding a concept if you don't know the components that understanding is made up of. So I agree that memorization isn't learning, but learning is impossible without memorization in the first place.
If you were to forget how to ride the bicycle everytime you stopped cycling, you would never learn. The same goes for neurosurgeons, mma fighters, psychologists and every field imaginable.
This was an amazing TED talk. What surprises me is I've always gone out and searched for truths. I've always wanted to get proven wrong so that I can adjust my views to fit reality. I honestly thought for the longest that this was a normal human process of curiosity. That's because i grouped the people that think this way with the ones that don't. I've always told people that I learn best with all the learning styles. That it depended on what I'm learning. I've taught myself how to ride a bike, and how to play guitar and I've been learning to code recently I've been noticing that the way I'm learning certain things would vary but the one thing that stayed consistent was if I used all my senses, I always remembered it better. This makes sense because when I involved all my senses in what I was learning I become more invested meaning it meant more to me. I'm glad my psychology professor showed me this TED talk. It's opened my understanding of how I can maximize my learning.
"We are not as limited (by the learning styles) as we sometimes think we are!". This did it for me plus her reasons Why should this matter. Very good talk!
This is one of the best Ted Talks I have seen. All these years, I believed in learning styles. She blew my mind with this information!
I really agree with this. Partly because I always thought the concept was kind of bullshit. I'm a good student and have a reasonable capacity for memorization, but any time I was forced to figure out my "learning style" I could not do it. Because I see the value in learning in different ways. What I think is more important for learning and building meaning is not so much the method of delivery, but how "active" you are with the material. Adding context. I also see learning style used as a cop-out by so many people. "I can't learn this way because my brain doesn't work like that". Every time someone says that to me I just want to face palm. Have you even TRIED? For all the students that say they can't learn from being lectured, I would venture to guess that the issue might have more to do with your focus and attention than actual disability. It's much easier to stay engaged with something that's in your hands, or something that looks pretty. I also think that learning to love reading from an early age can make a big difference. Many people try to avoid reading if at all possible, but it's just another method of acquiring information.
That said, these are just my opinions and of course I realize I could be wrong. I have not done any research in these areas. Very interesting and provocative video.
...
Learning styles can be taken as a medical or some kind of drug. Just as all drugs don't cure all diseases, this kind of concepts shouldn't be expected to cure all learning problems.
this is not provocative, this is just myth debunking, provocative/thought provoking/polemic would have been to pinpoint where this comes from and why it is so popular.
I agree to some point. May i add, at the same time it took the teacher, the tutor, the lecture to make it interesting. I always believe in Focus and Revision. During my Uni years i cursed some of my Uni friends who don't even take notes and yet they excel. They said "learn smart, not hard", i just wish they are in my shoes..
2 words: stimulated and disciplined?
A). Tesia Marshik used the 1973 study of "Chase and Simon" to demonstrate that learning styles or preferences do not enhance learning. We can learn through connecting our experiences or by using our experiences to gain knowledge, according to the study she explains, and most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning. As an example, they compare the abilities of an expert and beginner chessboard player and find that the expert has a significant advantage in remembering the position shown in the first photo because they understand the game's meaning, strategy, and have experience playing chessboard, which makes it easier for them to remember the positions. However, those advantages are useless because the pieces of chess are randomly arranged shown in the second photo, making it difficult for them to remember the positions because the position is not meaningful. She explained that our sensory or learning preferences or styles are not enough for us to learn or gain knowledge. It's about how we use our senses, learning preferences, and learning styles to connect ourselves or our own experiences, or to allow others to experience things to better understand things.
B). Three ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning according to Tesia Marshik. First, we store information in terms of meaning. I've realized like she did, that we didn't understand a certain topic, term, or word by simply reading it, memorizing it, or reading it numerous times unless we understand its meaning and relate it to our own experiences or situations to comprehend/understand its context. It's somehow true that most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning. Next, the best way to learn something depends on the content itself. Just, for example, we want to distinguish the differences in the smell of flowers we saw in the book. The best way for us to learn the differences of the flowers is by letting ourselves smell different flowers to understand their differences. It helps us to learn or understand things, depends on the content, and some sensory assists in learning. An example of this is listening to different sounds to understand the meaning or smelling things to recognize their difference. Last is using multiple senses. For example, we would like to learn specific sports such as basketball. Allowing ourselves to play basketball is the best way for us to learn, but we can also learn by watching others play the game and observing their technique and moves, as well as hearing or listening to other people's suggestions on how to play the game, and then applying all of that knowledge to our own learning.
Great comment, thank you.
What is this comment about
I was always confused by the different types of learners because I could never really learn well using any one of the types of learning styles. I only do quite well when I practice things over and over again and I always need a lot of time to recall a lot of information.
That's probably because your a Kinesthetic learner and this video is BS.
@@lularoefashion2254 The idea of learning styles is completely debunked. You realise that, right?
She presents valid points and research to her point that everyone learns through a variety of their senses, and that the mode of learning depends on the content. However, contrary to her point, most people prefer a specific content which is tied to a specific sense. For example, music is auditory and it comes to some people more naturally. Some are able to detect melodies, harmonies, and finer details in music better than others--even without training. Other people prefer and excel at visual arts and have a "keen eye" for visual details. So, granted, we all listen to music through our "auditory" sense and we all create visual art with our "visual" sense, people still do have content preferences based on sensory strengths.
If you'll listen again to the first few minutes of her talk you'll hear her specifically state that we do have preferences for how we learn; it just doesn't produce a significantly different learning outcome.
I understand her point, but in both ways whether I just (prefer) visual learning or
believed that my (style) of learning is visual, I still want my teacher to have some images or slides...
NOT only listening to her speaking,
and I still want to buy colorful book over a plain book that doesn't have any images !!
it doesn't matter if its a learning style or preference because the result is the same for me...
it makes me more comfortable and easier to learn.
+ I believe that teachers will have better results with their
students if they put in mind the 5 senses in general.
Me too but I think people are visual and it aids us in understanding - therefore helping us with meaning.
Yes, you are right but I think that the teacher's role is the biggest. Because if they have the talent to do this job, you will understand it. There are more important ones: context, teacher's role, to experience more. When you listen and see something it becomes more meaningful not about your learning style. She wants to tell us it is not about learning style, it is about authenticity.
Exactly plus she contradicted herself so I don’t believe this entir Ted talk at all 😂
Yes!! Appropriate visuals to learning help everyone!!
She literally stated in the video at around 8:27 when she stated: The best way to teach about song birds is to show an image of a songbird or to see real songbirds if possible. People learn through experience and the experience depends on the context and content. The fact that learning styles don't exist does not mean that teachers are going to just talk. We understand the brain better, we understand that the brain retains information in sensory memory that is meaningful or has an emotional response attached. It is better to learn through hands-on experiential learning activities and projects. EVERYONE learns this way. There is no learning style, there are no "math people",... our brains are all designed the same way to learn. Our experiences, our passions and interests, and our prior knowledge, all these things lend themselves to how students learn best.
A. ) Tesia Marshik used the study of "Chase and Simon" as her reference that learning styles or preferences do not enhance learning. Because we are learning through our experiences. She explained that we store information in terms of meaning and not connected to our sensory mode. And it is about how we use our senses, learning preferences, and learning styles to connect on our own experiences, and allow us to gain more experiences to have knowledge on it or understand things.
B. ) 3 ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning according to Tesia Marshik.
1. First, we store information in terms of meaning.
2. Second, the best way to learn something depends on the content itself.
3. Third, many things can be taught or learned using multiple senses.
I never forget things that are meaningful to me or I can relate with. This is an eye opener for me and I agree with Dr. Tesla.
It's not about matching learning style with teaching style, but it's about 'integrating' preferred and non-preferred (dominant and non-dominant) styles in a way that slightly challenges the learners.
That's all.
Yeah I lean towards the learning style not being the key to a learner learning, but another tool to keep the learner engaged in the content and process.
Yes!!! Absolutely- working with kids of all ages as a BCBA i cannot stress enough the importance of using preferred and non preferred in teaching while integrating their learning styles!
This was amazing and kind of dissapointing at the same time, taking into account that I believed in learning styles.
🤣🤣🤣same here
VARK or the Visual, Auditory, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic model is not completely wrong!
Just that, as teachers we need to blend these ways to make best of the understanding possible for different concepts/topics.
Cool video! I have to agree to this to a great extend, but I have to also mention: More often than not, just because some of the new theories are correct it doesn't mean we should dismiss everything in the older theories. Even new theories that seems accurate now are also sometimes just a bridge towards future newer theories. E.g. we though that it was smart to figure out the earth is actually round instead of flat, then someone said the earth is not really perfectly round, then someone would venture further about other answers in quantum physics and other new fields of theories that change everything again...
I have never really believe that learning styles are very accurate or conclusive, it have always been more like something to help us, plus even many of these theorists had often suggested to tap on multiple senses (as the speaker suggested too) instead of concentrating too much on one type - which is why although I have heard that many people are 'visual learners', a lecture with nothing else except a powerpoint slides show for hours would still be frowned upon nowadays. Moreover we have always known that there are many factors other than learning styles which affect learning retention.
I will be happy if the industry would agree with the speaker that it is not effective to spend too much time/resources to analyse into individuals' learning styles, and we can concentrate more on the contents and other critical factors of learning.
I think this presentation may be addressing a bit of a straw man argument when it comes to learning styles. While one’s learning preferences may not impact information retention in controlled experiments, they probably do impact one’s motivation and energy level to learn, both of which are as important as raw information intake to the process of creating meaning.
I’m not an expert on learning styles. But just as a brief experiment, I Googled “learning styles” and “motivation.” The first study that came up showed a correlation between visual learning style and motivation toward pursuing higher education. That certainly doesn’t prove anything. But it does demonstrate that perhaps the importance of understanding learning styles (or learning preferences, if you will) might not be in raw information intake but rather in how one’s preferences affect one’s ability to stick with and master a subject over the long term.
Great comment! Thank you!!!
@Ceol Not the comment we asked for, but the comment we needed.
@Ceol i was just going to say the same thing. Thanks for saving me the time!
@Ceol It's true in my experience that I can learn in any way. However, it takes me much less time to complete the study material in my preferred way of learning, as it comes very naturally to me. If I try to learn in other ways, it makes it becomes very time-consuming and boring.
And I think you display a fine example of cognitive dissonance.
There is no best way to learn something. Learning is learning. If something is presented in a non-convoluted way and the student is motivated and determined to learn the student will learn. Some will learn quicker and more deeply than others however all that means is that human beings are diverse.
A student's motivation is very important for learning anything. Set your goals clearly and then start learning materials that will get you to your goal. Focus and absorption of information should be high then. A teacher can't determine someone's life goals for them and therefore can't determine his/her level of motivation. "Styles" or "learning strategies" all have secondary importance in this matter.
+Drazen Zovic
After nearly 40 years of Teaching I have that motivation isn't just important. It's much bigger than that in my view. Show me the neuroscience for learning styles somebody please or shut the front door!
Stephen O'Brien There is no real science behind it.
I do agree. My problem is with Headteachers who are adamant that Specific Learning Styles exist and they also try to quantify the learning styles of each student numerically. It does complicate learning and it's Bad Science or nonsense at best.
@@stephenobrien2952 Strongly disagree.
If I take piano lessons and you have the same boring Hanon book you're intent on forcing on all your students, I quit.
Show me a Journey song, verbatim to the record and I'll have a good part of it by next week (fairly high skill level) IF I get basic reading skills and a walk-through.
Motivation and pertinence is EVERYTHING.
I found it pretty believable when I first heard about learning styles. Years went by, and never questioned it. As soon as I started hearing about the opposing viewpoint, I found that believable as well- more so when I started considering the number of people who stand to make a buck off of the idea. I'm no scientist, I never read any studies on it, but my belief is that while we all learn in different ways and while some people might be a little more or a little less able to understand something based on the manner in which it's presented, it's probably not so extreme as to justify all the labels.
Good teaching addresses a subject in a variety of different ways anyway. Discard all the nonsense and just get down to it.
This is the first time I been exposed to this concept...my interest was generated to seek this video out because I met an instructor at SFSU who specializes in Critically Reflective Intelligence teaching. I am reading an article entitled The Getting of Wisdom: What Critically Reflective Teaching is and Why it is importnat by Stephen Brookfield (1995) . It brings up critical, casual, and perscriptive assumptions we make about how things "should be happening" withing ourselve and the world because they relflect our inner thinking process/thoughts. That is faulty in many ways.
Interesting comment, but I can't pretend I understand what you are trying to say (I can certainly guess but I think it is better to clarify). Would you care to elaborate more please? For example, what are your thoughts about what are mentioned in this video in relation to your current interest and study in critical reflective teaching? What is the exact thing that you are referring to as faulty?
I suggest, providing multiple ways to access the information will benefit all learners. So it probably doesn't really matter if there's a "style' or not.... we need to cater to all learners....
no, we not need cater all learner. we need to make sure a particulat content is best learned in what mode. so, it's content-oriented instead of learning-style oriented (which is psedoscientific).
Yes. I'm not suggesting learning styles. We need multiple content based exposures, including explicit instruction, images, examples-and-non examples, different contexts, comparing and contrasting, morphology etc. to increase depth of understanding.
knowing what type of personality you have will help you know what way is best for you to learn...
I must admit that I am somewhat resistant to this notion in the sense that people have variations in their ability to process sensory information. We wouldn’t use visuals to teach something to someone who is blind, or audio to teach something to someone who is def. Individuals process sensory information differently, and this subsequently impacts how they recall information. Additionally, learning isn’t necessarily limited to our ability to recall specific information, there is also an element of learning that speaks to insight, critical thought, and experience. I would argue that understanding one’s dominant senses remains an important component of understanding how to approach teaching that individual (See Helen Keller). I would also argue that intelligence takes many forms, and is not limited to one’s ability to immediately recall a list words or images or a random arrangement of chess pieces. I agree that appealing to multiple senses is an important component of learning, and that deriving meaning is an essential element. I also see the problem of people potentially closing themselves off from information simply because it does not appeal to their self-identified dominant sense. But because individuals are the chief executive of their own operating systems, it is important to listen to their input and make an effort to tailor approaches to their teaching to increase efficacy of learning. Forging a network of neural pathways that stem from various sensory processing centers of the brain may help one derive meaning and thus store and access information more easily. Some individuals visualize an object when given a verbal prompt, and some individuals can replay entire concerts when given a verbal prompt (such as the name of their favorite music artist). Perhaps “learning styles” is a misnomer, and “dominant sensory processing style” would be a better way to refer to the variation in individuals’ ability to process and recall information.
I agree with so much that you say. You say ¨it is important to listen to their input and make an effort to tailor approaches to their teaching to to increase efficacy of learning¨. I think the most important thing is to help them examine different strategies so that they can make the learning choices that best serve them in the moment.
Also, I have different preferences in different moments. Sometimes a sense can get in the way of me completing a task. For example, if I need to unlock a door in the dark, it can help me to close my eyes. This also helps me if I need to play a piano piece by memory. And, if I have a piece memorized, having the music in front of me confuses me. Perhaps I just don´t have the skill to be able to make sense of it yet. So, it isn´t about rigid learning styles, but all about one´s needs and goals in a particular moment in their learning journey. Also, I would say that their are times when a strategy that seems more difficult in the moment might be the best choice according to our goals. The idea of rigid learning styles might get in the way of us taking advantage of this. That is also something to help students examine.
I bombed a job interview many years ago because I had the audacity to question the interviewer's conception of learning styles. I wish this video was around then!
Learning styles always helped me to believe that I was outstanding in that I had no particular learning style. I had assumed that since it was invested in, that there might be definite merit to the origin of the theory, but not necessarily indicating that it was a truth. This did help to create the idea in my head that because of the infinite diversity of humanity, that there was inherently a possibility that i could be not only apt at benefitting from multiple of these styles, that i could benefit from them all. Much like she mentioned in the presentation, there could be deficit in limiting yourself to one learning style because of a perceived limitation to one, I often think that when addressed as a whole, with one being extra beneficial (relating to interest base memory) that learning Via a personal preference could benefit the learning experience. as in the difference between learning and education. you can easily learn through multiple platforms, or styles, but you may tend to create internal associations to the material when applied through a preferred 'learning style'. This leaves credence to the initial understanding of how learning styles came to be and also how they can simultaneously be useless. Though I don't believe the intent of this presentation was to say that there was no foundation or merit to the concept, just that the concept has been so widely adopted that it became less of a tool with applications and more of a rule.
-end rant
Learning styles or preferences cannot be referred to students only. For me, it can be practitioners tools in order to facilitate comprehensible input or scaffold students to their zone of proximal development considering their learning preferences- the so-called learning styles. Whether it is students' learning styles or teachers' teaching styles, the focal point is enhancing learning. I do believe it is meaningful to expose students into various channel of input. When we enter into students threshold through their preferences, they let the "input" to get in the process of becoming "intake".
Those who have difficulty with language/literacy need visual supports and manipulatives to learn many concepts, everyone benefits from them.
I read about this in Dr. Sousa's textbooks at SDSU while pursuing my teaching credential. Learning is definitely linked to our emotions and only possible if the student feels the teacher genuinely cares for him/ her.
I hope that's not the way you actually think about learning.
That’s so self-evidently false it’s kind of scary that you were willing to say it.
"...only possible if the student feels the teacher genuinely cares for him/ her" ??? *citation needed
I am very glad I actually watched this video. She was an amazing speaker and very informative!
I'm agree with her, I'm French teacher, and l discover it every day , the learner's styles is very sophisticated, I must take account all 3 styles in same situation-problem
The number of people in the comments saying that PhD professor doesn't understand the research (or lack thereof) behind "learning styles" is astounding.
I do grasp the idea, but there were some things that I feel are a bit inconsistent. I think that 'preferred learning style' is not the same as 'preferred teaching style'. 'Learning style' is not about the way you present the material to students. It's about how they learn it best.
If a teacher wants his students to learn how a sparrow looks like, of course he'll show them a picture of it, because that's the easiest and quickest way for him to convey that piece of knowledge. It would be less effective and more time-consuming to do it another way. That is a teaching method, though, used mainly to present the idea.
However, I feel that the real question here is how are the students going to practice and remember that information. And that would refer to the way they learn best and in the most effective way for them. Are they going to sit with a picture and look at it just as the teacher asked them to do in class? Are they going to draw a bird themselves or print a picture and colour it? Maybe, as it was mentioned in the lecture, they have better auditory memories and they would memorize it more easily if they described it out loud instead of just looking at the picture silently? Or if they described it by writing it down, because they have better memories of things they note down?
Doesn't 'having better auditory/visual/tactile memories' prompt us to study in a certain way, because it's the easiest and most effective for us?
Totally agree
I agree to some extent, but I still believe that everyone has a learning style that best suites them. may be more than one.
There is a tremendous about of pressure on teachers to conform to the latests fads. When students are confronted with new learning they now say, well you don't teach in my learning style so I can't get it. It takes a long time to get through that belief. What I keep in mind is knowing where students are and working from there. What "categories" do they have already and which ones will be uncomfortable to establish when new ideas are introduced. These categories help create meaning. ( The idea we someone is an olfactory is a category of "absurd" so we can begin to reorganize where we put information). In my view, part of the push for fads is to promote a book. A more sinister thought is that fads are intended to dismantle public confidence in public education so for profit organizations can come in to "save the day". In the meantime, I will continue to teach according to what I know works according to research.
I find it easier to learn with how we desire, it makes learning more easy because it makes it feel like i'm not working. it brings more ease and joy of working towards your goal and progressing. This video was life changing
thank you for challenging the ossified ideas that some people have about human beings.
I think it's silly that we have so many academics trying to disprove something that really is simple to understand and in simplicity makes it easier for people to conceptualise how to improve learning experiences!
I agree that we don't have 'set' learning styles, in fact we each learn across all means, and learning is context-specific therefore we have 'preferred learning styles' to the experience/context we are in, in which we can store memory either visually, auditorly etc etc
The idea of specific styles is good to help people process information! 'the key is preferred learning styles exist'
no one argues that we learn only one way, rather our learning style helps us to learn a meaningful information better, or efficiently, that's it. she
Based from experience as a student and as a teacher, I'd rather conclude that 'there are two sides of the coin". Thus, I agree at one point, and I also disagree on the other hand.
I agree that learning is best elicited when the learner finds it meaningful. But it is also undeniably true that we are diversed species, thus, we vary in strength and weaknesses. A concrete context would be the strength of man vs. that of a woman. They
are quite distinctive except perhaps for some exceptional cases.
Studies on Learning Styles were actually developed to help and support students who were considered 'less achievers' as evaluated by Aptitude or IQ Standards. Abilities to perceive meaning may differ from one student to another. And personal preferences could play a keyrole in one's perception of meaning, thus, learning style may not be totally a myth.
On one hand, I do agree that placing great emphasis on learning styles may also be debilitating other higher order skills. I personally believe that learning styles doesn't really create 'impact' on learning per se (for average learners). THANKS FOR SUCH AN ENLIGHTENING VIDEO.
Great comment, insightful note on the less achievers and why learning styles were developed. I'm interested in learning more about that and the origins of these ideas. Do you maybe have the names and year of the researchers that did these studies?
I totally agree with the contents of the video but I just wanted to say that I do not think that this concept is actually wasting any of our education resources. Mainly because these methods help you to remember your lessons. And sadly still mostly students are not tested if they understand the lessons rather they are still tested on the basis of their memory. And I feel that this is also one of the reasons why the idea of different learning styles still persists and it will persist as long as the current situations do not change.
Hola
Comparto tu opinión, en algún momento de mi vida pensé que aprendía de diferentes formas, pero todos te dicen....es imposible. Ahora que te escucho entiendo que era cierto. De verdad es, que la gente no quiere pensar en cambios, se quedan en el lado cómodo, en donde ya les resolvieron sus dudas antes y no hay nada más. Te felicito.
A child coming from a domestic and social setting with a myriad exposure to situations of behavior change attends a class programmed to just a typical mode of learning and finds himself or herself baffled by the way content just because only a bit of learning habit is featured and we call it teaching to the learning styles! The world doesn't give us information in just one method, rather we gather it through a variety of means. Unless the lesson makes any sense,we shut out our brain. What a beautiful presentation and convincing too.
Awesome. I always thought so but never had an opportunity to prove it. Now you've done the job, thanks so much for sharing, Dr. Marshik.
She is just matching learning to the way some teachers are teaching. She is also playing with vocabulary. Background knowledge is important to teaching. Is this teacher thinking teachers do not teach background knowledge. It is as if she thinks people use "learning styles" as the end of all ends. Good teachers also take into account what they are teaching. So her criticism is only valid if a teacher uses the idea of learning styles as the WAY to teach rather than a tool in our backpack. When I taught in Saudi Arabia the women really PREFERRED auditory learning. When teaching I could accelerate the students learning, but incorporating activities that used this awareness. However, I also worked on making students more aware of the visual activities. I taught students skills to help them learn more visually. Good teachers instruct using all modalities. This will benefit ALL students like kids with disabilities (i.e. deaf students, blind students) and also help students from various backgrounds.
And that is why I've always found it hard to answer that question myself - What is your learning style? - mostly because I have no preference or pre-ordained style. What works best for the moment works best for me too. That and I hate labels!
Labels are part of how you quantify results.
Great presentation! Clear and concise. Well-reasoned. Other people are saying this same thing about learning styles -- at least that the visual/auditory/kinaesthetic learning styles theory is overwhelmingly not supported by research. I am starting to believe that learning styles do not mean much. We learn and remember things based much more on meaning.
A. There are many ways to test the study about the misconception of learning styles, but according to Tesia Marshik, one basic design in testing this is by bringing in a bunch of different people - almost like a survey - with different learning styles, teach them in a variety of ways according to their supposed preferred learning styles, and then see if teaching them in one way was somehow better for them or more effective than the others. As an example, she had a list of words she wanted them to memorize and in one group she presented only the list of words, one group got the presented images of similar words, and lastly, one group got the sounds of the same words. Through this, they expected that by the end of the study, at least one of those three groups with different learning styles will recall more words than the other. But they all turned out to be exactly the same; regardless of how the material was presented to them.
B. According to Tesia Marshik, the three (3) actual ways we retain information or enhance learning is 1) most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning and is not tied to one particular sense or sensory mode, 2) the best way to learn (or teach) something depends on the content itself and what is possibly the best way to teach it, and 3) many things can be taught/learned using multiple senses; implying that incorporating multiple sensory experiences makes learning more meaningful.
Thank you for confirming what i already knew ,now I can identify my childs learning style now in good time😊
Honestly, even as a teacher who was trained about Learning Styles, and did for a time think that the notion was valid, I totally agree with what was said here.
I have two comments, however:
1. I don't think that most teachers have time to personalize their lesson plans for each individual learning style. So while I agree it is a waste of time for them to be doing so, I don't think it should be a concern.
2. The whole time I was listening, I kept waiting for her to address the fact that even if learning styles are legitimate, the point of the discussion at all is so that teachers consider the fact that variety in instructional method is vital to the successful transference of information from teacher to student. If I stand and lecture for two hours, who cares if you're an auditory learner, you are going to fall asleep. The keen educator has to be aware that to engage students and keep them actively participating in a lesson, they need to vary the methods of instruction (group activity, role-playing, etc.).
I think Howard Gardner's work on Multiple Intelligences may be more palatable, in that he supposes that we all have a varying level of intelligence in the different intelligences (logical, spatial, etc.), but the point is that we all learn a certain amount in all of the different intelligences. As an educator, we have to be willing and prepared to satisfy them all.
I think your first point is partly correct. Teachers don't often actually personalise their lessons for learning styles but the is spent on evaluating learning styles and money is spent on tests. It is also a significant part of teacher training and PD and performance evaluations.
Regarding MI, it has all of the same problems as learning styles. It is popular and sticks around as people feel that it must be right and like the idea of it, although there is no evidence.
A). Tesia Marshik used the study of "Chase and Simon" to demonstrate that learning styles or preferences do not enhance learning. We can learn through our experiences by using our experiences to gain knowledge, according to the study she explains, and most of what we learn is stored in terms of meaning.
3 ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning according to Tesia Marshik.
1st . First, we store information in terms of meaning.
2nd, the best way to learn something depends on the content itself.
3rd Many things can be taught or learned using multiple senses.
In language learning, for example, the affective factor is VERY important to the process. So if an adult learner feels it is important to know the rules, even though research shows otherwise, then the teacher should go ahead and teach the rules. Also, even though you think people may not be auditory learners, in language learning the folks who "hear" sounds well, typically speak sooner. So in this case, as a teacher, I recognize that students have strengths and weakness in the language skill domain (may not be in the small learning style domain e.g. extroverts usually have more practice using the language than introverts). Then I can add to my classroom teaching diversity to meet the unique needs of the student.
This is worth a second listen.
Aprendí que no tenemos un estilo de aprendizaje particular, que podemos aprender de muchas maneras. Lo que determina que yo aprenda no es un ''estilo de aprendizaje'' sino el sentido que tenga para mi lo que estoy aprendiendo, valga la redundancia. ( Excelente argumento el de los jugadores de ajedrez, por eso creo que es razonable saber eso)
Reading the comments id suggest some watching it again and listen more carefully . Great presentation and love to see myths blown away by intelligence
I would agree with her but I am definitely a visual learner. To prove this I just listened to this entire speech and I have no idea what this was about. Other than the part where she explains every detail about how we learn through experiences and what things relate and mean to us. Oh yeah, and how we tend to search for things that confirm our narrow minded beliefs about ourselves because change is scary. Wow, I guess I did learn something by listening. Thank you!! 😊🙌
@@dans2971 how do you know I totally were learned by watching and listening and looking and doing things so I'm more kinesthetic and a visual learner but I have a hard time understanding anything if I was just listening to it okay you speak for yourself please
Im a visual too i think but maybe an spatial imagery learner like creating 3d object in my mind while listening and I also prefer learning by looking on them
@@jasonpelerine7817 there is no credible evidence that learning styles exist. I'd recommend that you watch the video you commented on.
She literally said there are no evidences that preferential learning works (visual, audio, olfactory, etc), and yet you agreed with her and that you are a visual learner. She is right, people just don’t want to be wrong.
this was an amazing video.first, I wasn't convinced by the idea ,but when I gave her an obortunity I got her point.then,I think that she is right, we should not waste our potentials as well as abilities ,yet we should vary and expand while learning :)
A new perspective to the learning style.The best way to learn depands on the content ( blending).
As a part of my class assignment i watched this video. I found it very interesting and partial holding some truth. The only part i disagreed with is letting science be the determining factor of whats real. Science can only process to a certain level, but lacks the ability to deep dipper and go higher. 🙏🏾
she is right, it really makes no difference what type of stimulus you get, if you see or hear the word dog you still picture the dog in your head. the way we differ in learning really is the way we encode information once it's in the brain. this can be easily improved with associations and meaningful encoding of stimulus. that's how you learn better.
While there are "preferred" ways to learn for many people, I think the speaker's statement towards the end (and I paraphrase) that "incorporating multiple sensory experiences into one lesson makes it more meaningful for all students" is the important takeaway. In teaching music for 30+ years, I have always tried to infuse my lessons with as many different sensory experiences as possible. It just always seemed to make sense that by using the tactile, auditory, visual, and kinesthetic senses together in the same lesson not only would touch upon students' individual preferences but also engage them with learning in multiple ways, thus giving them a better opportunity to actually perform and learn the concepts I was trying to teach them. One example of this is teaching students a folk dance. Breaking down the steps and practicing short phrases (kinesthetic), looking at a diagram of the choreography (visual), listening for the musical form of the piece and being aware of the A and B sections (etc.), and singing the lyrics (if there are lyrics to the dance) then combining these activities in various ways- have proven to me that students will be overall much more successful in the end. Elementary music teachers have taught this way for a long time.
Really like your analogy
This might be applicable to adults to some extent but I can attest to kids having different learning styles. Little kids enjoy crafts and learning through play because they get to touch and feel things. People generally have more than one style of learning but one is stronger. I have three kids who I homeschool and they all learn differently. I started teaching them reading at about the same age and I quickly discovered that the teaching style that worked for one was not working for the next one because they learn differently.
Anecdotal accounts don’t mean anything. She is citing empirical and scientific research. You’re entitled to your opinion but you may want to expand your scope past your own home.
@@C4LLM3G0D159 until you listen to the opposing scientific and empirical data that supports learning styles. That’s the beauty of science. There’s always data to support the opposite side.
I would like to paraphrase Guy Claxton that it does not matter what you see, it is important what you are looking for, not what you know, it is what you want to learn. I think this could fit into what Dr. Marshik is talking about. I think this idea should be spread more aggressively. Thank you, Dr. Marshik.
This inquisitive tedtalk is more relevant than ever
For lists and short term objectives I see how those tests can apply, but for a concept its very difficult to say that there aren't learning styles. Lets say a teen is taking Algebra and the classes is studying Logarithms. Some of the kids in the class will understand the concept after writing down the notes from the board, while other kids won't understand it all until they practice with them and apply them in problems. I've been interning at high school for two years and I believe that what your say can apply in very specific situation, but there are different types of learning styles for sure.
A. Tesia Marshik said, the key is when put to the test, these learning styles don’t exist, and it doesn’t make a difference. Now I will say that when we survey people, many people say they have preferences. So if I asked you, “How would you like to learn something?” or “How would you like to study?”, many of you might say, “I’d prefer to see it,” or “I’d prefer to hear it,” or “I’d prefer to actually do it.” So that’s true. People have a preference but those preferences don’t actually enhance your learning when we test them in experimental conditions. And there are many different ways to test this, but the basic design is this: We bring in a bunch of different people who have supposedly different learning styles. We teach them in a variety of ways. And then we see if teaching them in one way somehow was better for them or more effective than others.
B. The three ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning, according to Tesia Marshik
1. Most of what you learn is stored in terms of meaning. In order to retain information, we have to organize it in a way that’s meaningful.
2. The best way to learn (or teach) something really depends on what it is you want to learn. It depends on the content itself.
3. Many things can be taught/ learned using multiple senses.
That one guy sleeping at 10:56 is a big mood
A. There is no particular study, but there have been several meta-analysis papers where in all of them have concluded that same thing that there is still no evidence that the matching styles to supposed learning styles or the students preferences actually makes a difference.
B. According to Tesia Marshik the three ways on how we retain information or enhance our learning is the Meaning, Content and the Multiple Senses.
muy bueno el video muchas gracias.
En resumen no debe de ser de importancia la forma de estilo que se lleve acabo el aprendizaje, en realidad sino la disposición y el interés que le pongas., como tener buena actitud positiva, darle la importancia ,disponibilidad, no rendirse ,no dejar de intentarlo sin importar la forma en que te quieran transmitir el conocimiento y así ser innovadores aun mundo que avanza y avanza .
information will benefit all learners. So it probably doesn't really matter if there's a "style' . Good video
In short, Repetition is only the best way to master what you want to learn.
i never thought about this topic that way. It was a very moving video.
I'm a homeschool mom of 4 and I discovered at an early age for my two oldest boys, that a way of learning, I call it a "processing style", made memorization almost magically easier for them. I developed a test when they were ages 4 and 6, presenting a question that was beyond their current grade level, to each boy separately. I found that with very little repetition, as in one time, they could tell me the answer to the quiz or question and it was one particular style of learning. For one of my boys or was auditory and one it was tactile. I have a theory though, being that probably all the test subjects have been adults who have been saturated in a strictly visual/auditory education system, that their brains have learned to learn in the way they've had to, but that they're actually wiref fairly strongly for a primary learning style. I continue to see rapid growth with my kids, having been able to tailor their learning to what works best for them.
I say it's absolutely true that people have a learning style and that they would learn much better and faster if taught from a young age to work with it.
learning a subject is not same with memorization of a list and call the information back from long term memory. As the bloom taxonomy indicates, there are many levels such as comprehension, application, analysis,synthesis and creation as well as knwoing and remembering. Remembering the concepts is the most primitive level of learning and it is acttulay not counted as learning as well in terms of many learning theories such as cognitive theories, .constructivism.. Those memorization of lists experiments actually measure the differences in terms of memorization styles rather than learning preferences, I think. . it is very early to say that there is no learning style by a such overconfidence, even there are many researches, models, theories on this subject. Lastly just ı said memorization of a list or remembering the items indicated memorization preferences or the learning strategies rather than learning itself....
Well, there is no evidence that learning styles exists so far. While remembering is the lowest level of Bloom's Taxonomy, it is foundational for the higher levels.
still, memorization is a necessary step and the most adequate to study first. You can't study "learning" as a whole, that's just not how cognitive science works, you've got to break it down and simpler more primal functions. Her argument is still valid though, because what she's talking about is a myth about perceptual learning
Yes it is foundational but the whole cannot be reduced into its smaller parts, you cant say there is no EVIDENCE you can't disregard all the articles so far supporting learning styles just by saying there is no evidence it is something like proposing flat earth theory they also say there is no evidence for a spherical earth model
well if she is talking about a myth about memorization or perceptual learning she shoul emphasize those words.. there are many learning styles theories and models and you cant just skip it by saying no evidence exist it is like there is no evidence for speherical earth model or we cant see any evidence of the notion of economy in the bazaar or saying like there is no evidence for intelligence in the brain because brain scannings don't give any concrete photo of intelligence in the brain
I think she defines what she's talking about well enough throughout the video (I got what she meant and I was watching th same thing as you), but then that's just a matter of opinion.
Nevertheless, there are no serious scientific papers out there supporting learning styles (the definition of learning styles we agreed upon and the one she states, not the existence of inter individual differences in perceptual acuity and comprehension ease), so she doesn't have to discard "all the evidence", there ain't actually any (that's why we use the word "myth" in that case).
Here she's not just "skipping it because no evidence exists" (which would be reason enough to doubt any such theory), she's debunking it because of all the evidence against it. It might be hard for one to be convinced by such a small talk that summarizes the ideas and the research VERY quickly, that much I understand. But then if you want to go further into the subject it is your job to exercise your critical mind and to examine references that would go both ways: look for research defending learning styles theory, look for research debunking it (you can begin with the ones she quotes), and make your own idea about it, but don't limit yourself to thinking that she's "just skipping it because no evidence exists", thats just not true from my point of view and it really look like you're just validating your own primary bias towards that subject.
Thank you for a wonderfully provocative talk that changes a framework I've lived with for a long time! Meaning, and I would add that student choice is an important part of meaning making.
Miningfull and associative learning are the most important ways of learning. I am with you.
Learning styles...,no, they don't exist. Thanks for putting this idea in its place. Learning preferences on the other hand...
I can read something five times and not understand how to put it together or fix it. I can have someone show me once and get it almost always right away.
Was hoping there would be links to the studies that she referenced.
I loved this TED Talk.
New perspective.❤ Thank you.😊
Thank you! So well said and presented. As a speech-langauge pathologist and literacy specialist, I agree 100%
I always failed in school. By coincidence I found a book about learning styles, they described me to the detail! And after I started to apply their advice, I became a very good student, I was a bad one all my life!
And if this woman puts me in a field to learn to play football, I might through the ball on her head! Because I hate to learn that way! The same way I hated gym. Or if they make me just listening to somebody... I could fall asleep 2 minutes later! I had a Literature teacher, you could tell, he knew a lot, he never read anything, all was in his memory. The only problem, I would wake up when the school bell rang... never knew what he taught! So, I don´t believe a word of what she says! I am living proof that knowing yourself it helps you improve a lot! Or, are we built in series??? I thought we were different individuals...
+Jackie Levaggi I think you have missed the point of the talk. This reminds me of the discussions about multi-tasking, and how science has shown without a shadow of a doubt that NOBODY can multi-task effectively - our brains are not made for it. But then ... there's always somebody who says, "Yes but.. I am different. I CAN multitask, and I know it." And this is why people text and drive. They just don't listen.
Mark Smith
Yeah! Your science has the answer for everything! They know things for a fact Specially psychiatry, psychology and all the ones related to them! No wonder why there are so many theories and so little proof to the point that they can not even detect for a fact, for example, at an early age, a psychotic person who later in life will be a mass or series killer! And everyday they make new theories!!! And new crazy people shows up massacring human beings... Yeah! You and your truth!!! The only exception is brain science... which is pretty new and not all scientists can agree with all the facts or tests that show "apparent" facts. We are not talking here about exact sciences! Even though if they result to be exact, they are still in diapers! But if you think you are right, you are...
+Jackie Levaggi I think you mean serial killer.
You are right... English is my second language
Perhaps, that some folks are better at being bad multi-taskers than others? Just saying...
Its very funny reading all these comments. People saying they are teachers and it worked for them...CONFIRMATION BIAS. She literally went over that in the talk! People are acting like this is her idea and its just her opinion. She is simply presenting evidence from a plethora of studies that have taken place on the subject. She didn't just wake up and think you know what I'm gonna rail against learning styles because I think its wrong; She did the research and drew a logical path to a sound conclusion.
There's a lot of nitpicky comments about memorization vs. learning, but I think this is mostly the defensiveness she mentioned. I thought the talk was well done and gave very good examples AND anticipated the arguments of the audience. Plus, in the end it talked about real-world applications. Well done!
Learning styles explained beautifully!
So on the official course selection software for the TDSB there is also a bunch of personality quizzes. After being pressured by guidance I took the learning styles quiz.
What happened? I got a perfect one-third split between audiory, visual, and kinesthetic.
I hated that quiz. The questions very obviously telegraphed their intent to the reader. For example:
"Which is your favorite art subject: Visual arts, music, or drama?"
Instantly I knew that choosing music would class me as auditory, visual arts as visual, and drama as kinesthetic.
What if I learn music theory through pictures? And isn't art class kinesthetic when you make a drawing? And what if you listen to a play in drama class?
"If you are with a group of strangers at a party, what would be best for you to remember everyone?"
A. Everyone wears a name tag
B. Everyone says their name
C. Everyone does an icebreaker
What does that even mean?
"You picked name tag, therefore you are a visual learner. You wanted an icebreaker, therefore you are kinestetic."
Makes no sense. Makes none whatsoever.
"You like music more than art, therefore you are an auditory learner." Big bruh moment
Where can I find a book or an article about what she is saying!
There is no reason to do that Wendy. Just relax...
she is wrong.
But the meaning is always accompanied by the referent and the signifier because these three aspects are part of the sign. That's why I think we can´t learn just in terms of meaning. In any case, we learn in terms of signs.
Learn by doing. Practice. Also storytelling, scenarios and using emotional connections to the material help with remembering.
I feel gaslit by the section where she basically said "if you disagree with me it's your confirmation bias".
I don't care whether learning styles are real or not, but the idea that teachers need to vary their teaching style to keep students engaged and help everyone in the room learn seems like a good idea to me.
I always just assumed I had a mixed learning style. Turns out I just like to be kept interested, and for me, telling teachers they don't need to engage with students auditorily, visually, and kinaesthetically is just going to set us back years to teachers giving dry lectures, or copying out of textbooks. All the things that take the fun out of learning.
She is pedantic. I would hate to have her as a teacher.
What about people with learning difficulties?
What a fantastic lecture! Presented so clearly and concisely 🙌
Thank you Tesia Marshik!
I think we can all agree listening to someone talk for 3+ hours is not the best teaching/learning technique
I think you should reflect on the meaning of 'learning'. It is not a synonym for 'memorizing', thus the research you are using can't disclaim the existence of ALL learning style theories, because they are not all about memorizing. There are MANY theories out there. They are only tools to help understand and support one's uniqueness in a moment in time, and NOT to be used as permanent labels. To add to the irony, you've talked about the Garner's Theory of Multiple Intelligence trying to debunk learning styles. And by the way, teacher really do have to learn about the uniqueness of the individual learning process, otherwise they would unconsciously use mostly their own preferred learning strategy. I think what you are trying to say is not that they do not exist, but they are misinterpreted and misused and that I agree on. I hope you focus in the next presentation less on why others are wrong and you are right, and more on meaningful content.
Perhaps you should go and look at the studies she referenced, as she asked, and see if they are all about memorizing. I agree that teachers should teach a variety of learning strategies, but not talk about learning styles at all, because they are so misinterpreted. I think her talk was very meaningful. When she talked about confirmation bias, that is something all humans suffer from.
What I think is ironic is that you've made a point of saying that teachers need to use learning style theory because otherwise they would be doing a bad job BECAUSE of learning style theory (quote : "they would unconsciously use mostly their own preferred learning strategy". Why would they have a own preferred learning strategy ? Because they would believe wrong facts about learning and there being better strategies than others, i.e. because of a learning style theory)
well said....