As an educator, I was taught learning styles theory, and we were told to try to incorporate some or all of them in the lessons. The result was teaching the same material in a few different ways so that you'd reach everyone. The actual outcome was the material was presented multiple times, so the repeated exposure through a variety of styles helped everyone remember better. Don't just teach visual learners visually and kinesthetic learners with experiments; teach everyone with everything.
@@Wally03 They are probably quite busy teaching, and teaching well by the sounds of things. Perhaps the education policy makers, who are not teachers, and are much more influenced by political trends would be better to deal with this. Perhaps you could write a letter to your local representative?
I agree with you that interest is very important, but I disagree that will lead to learning by itself. You can be deeply interested in a subject, but if no one presents that information to you, or at least in a intelligible way, then you will never understand no matter how much you want to know. This is excluding experimenting things and discovering it yourself. Having an interest is important nonetheless. If your teacher is presenting the material poorly, your innate interest will lead to you seeking out that information elsewhere. But that other source of information still need to present it in a understandable way. If you aren't interested, that won't happen. Interest just means you are more willing to find alternative forms of presentation.
In school I found I learned best by writing things down because during tests i could remember myself writing it down. I don't think I have that learning style, I just think I was creating memories to look back on during my exams.
Yeah, that's a big reason why one of my teachers insists on us taking handwritten notes rather than typed notes, cause handwritten notes are supposed to make a stronger memory than typing
That’s actually true! If you wrote things down besides reading them and all the others things you make a better connection in your brain so you can recall it better! Just like he said; a combination of different styles is the best way to learn
I recall a teacher telling me he practised the martial art of "Tell-show-do", he further explained that his students learned best when first he told them about the subject matter, then he showed them a demonstration of the material, and finally got them to practise it themselves. This essentially covered all the perceived learning styles and helped everyone in his classes learn fairly uniformly.
Sounds like PPP (Present, Practice, Production).. Anyway, all different names for approaches that may or may not be scientifically based but have varying degrees of merit.
@@brucedavis3816 Group work is emphasized because if kids are interested in each others' outcomes and tutor each other, then you functionally end up with more than one teacher and more classes than what the subject allotted, which helps somewhat cover the major weakness of trying to teach 20+ students at the same time on a tiny budget of hours per week.
Google trying to enforce that we are all unique in some way that gives us benefits. Critical race theory whatnot. It seemed like veritasium started to backpedal on that idea though when he revealed that people employ memory strategies rather than simply being genetically dominant
I'm a teacher who just discovered your channel. When you asked those people what Learning Style they were I imagined what I'd say in that position and I would have said "all of them - I'm a multi-modal learner". Then you went on and talked about multimodality so I take some solace in the fact that I am doing my best for my students in following this approach.
It's about engagement, students learn better when their attention is maintained.. most people say they're visual learners because that's the easiest sense to actively engage in learning..
Natural curiosity makes you go ahead and find any source to learn about. It doesn't matter if text, visual, kinestethic or auditive. Everything will do and the whole mixture of those is great to learn anything
I feel like this quiz heavily relies on a persons ability to recall from memory rather than understanding and learning the answers, going home and sleeping, coming back tomorrow and still being able to know it because you learnt it rather than just you remembered. Memory fades but knowledge doesnt
Me brain in study or in exam Pls help My brain when playin WT/WoT LT go here, defend this flank, kill that R3 T20, arty annoying LT kick their ass, flank enemy is weak and cant spread tank anymore, rush he need to reload
My sister was part of a huge, 50 State VARK study. The largest and most conclusive study ever done. The conclusion at which they arrived was this: switching up teaching styles helps all children remain engaged in their studies. Not that e eryone has a learning style. The study concluded that everyone has all learning styles.
I find that the best learning style is the desire to learn. Often when introducing a new topic or subject, teachers need to draw that desire out, and then the student will be motivated to learn. One of the biggest questions I often hear in class as a student is "why do we need to learn this?" If the teacher cannot answer that in a satisfying way, the student will be less likely to retain what they learn.
This is amplified in ADHD students. Studies have found that ADHD students are under represented in engineering, but run circles around "normal" students in engineering when they are taught with a stronger emphasis on intuition based learning and applying the learning in a gratifying way. People with ADHD are incapable of staying focused if they do not see relevance in what they are learning. IMO, there are a lot more people with undiagnosed ADHD than realized. I don't even think its a disorder, just a different type of cognition. The systems in place simply don't facilitate this learning style because they just want to have students memorize cookie cutter problems for exams and get them pushed through as quickly as possible.
Autistic until proven otherwise here. This is so true. If someone doesn't want to learn, or doesn't see the value in what they're learning, they simply won't, because they don't care. My preferred learning style is games. Probably so is everyone's. If you make a game out of it, kids will remember things better. Teachers be like, "why can y'all memorize these rap songs but not the periodic table of the elements?" Because it's not fun and they don't care. They don't see the value in learning the periodic table of the elements beyond not wanting to get in trouble with their parents. For me, learning itself was fun. The process of learning was fun. No other kid I knew felt this way. If kids aren't engaged, you gotta find a way to appeal to them, and make it fun.
I love that both the replies are about autism and adhd, since I was about to go on a rant about the same thing lol. I’ve always thought my learning style was “doing” or I guess kinetic, but that’s really because when I’m doing something I’m actively engaged and I *want* to be. Chemistry for me this past year was fun and interesting because it was new and exciting, algebra 2 was the worst math class I’ve ever taken because it wasn’t… but trig at the end of the year was fun. The best way to get students to retain information is to get them engaged and having fun, instead of stressing the crap out of them and using traditional methods that are way outdated.
@@jenius9164 I would like to "softly" dispute this. I'm ADHD and college was hell for me. However, I love to learn. I think learning new things is one of the most satisfying aspects of being alive. The problem for me was learning in SCHOOL. Being forced to learn was no longer learning to me. It was a chore. And I hate chores. Often times, I would be interested in a subject, but would not get a good final grade. I think learning in school is a completely different thing from learning in general.
I tried learning to code for ages. It wasn't until I had a reason to actually code something I was interested in that it clicked. I believe that's the key. Find a reason, find a passion, learn and put into practice.
From experience, I agree. I started a math major in college and had amazing results. I always took things I learned and tried to tackle impossible problems in mathematics with those. It still helps me today now that I've switched to a bachelor's in computer science and am now learning to code.
My science teacher always said that there is no learning style. As long as you make the topic engaging and interesting the students learn. And the only way to do that is by involving all the 4 senses you require. Eyes for visual, ears for audio, mouth for communication and hands for hands on.
@@damyr Personally I had to click "read more". Are you positive you didn't click it so automatically that you didn't realize you had? I've done stuff like that before.
I’m so glad you’ve made this video, as a professor I’ve noticed many of my students have really bought into these ideas about learning and unfortunately will often attached fixed mindsets to their ability to learn depending on whether the pedagogy matches their preferred learning style.
Of course we bought into this. A concerning number of my K12 teachers bought into this too. Almost total reinforcement from the outset for this line of thinking.
This video is so interesting because there are a number of articles that deal with learning and pedagogical practice in terms of learning style. Especially concerning indigenous cultures.
I strongly regret my past 2 yrs in university having the exact mindset u mentioned... After realizing book is one of the the best methods, learning became less tougher. (Never easy though...)
There's the pitfall we have to be wary of in accepting "everyone learns the same way" though. That being, people will throw those with learning disabilities or just take a little longer to understand a topic under the bus (as we tend to do already). Despite the fact there's plenty of dyslexic people, for example, who have contributed to science (since we value that so much). Also, doing well in school isn't indicative of future success. My mother who's a nurse said a lot of straight A students weren't cut for real work, just to give a personal example. There's plenty out there though. There's more to this than just "everyone learns the same". What about teaching styles? Genetics? Cultural values? Use of language? Environment? Mental states/stresses? Or maybe something we haven't thought of yet. This stuff is not as cut and dry as so many people think it is. That within itself is why it's so heavily debated and controversial.
@@korinoriz This. The difference the New Zealand teacher saw between teachers may not be down to "learning styles", but to 'seeing' the individual pupil. If a teacher listen to the pupil and accommodate the pupil feel safe and valued and this further learning. When the pupil is on board with learning the teacher can nudge the pupil in a direction of instruction that makes the teacher's life easier. Trying to do it the other way around disconnect a substantial percentage of pupils from learning. Sadly the focus today is on "efficiency" and standardization and the-devil-take-the-rest. I would posit that we are currently sacrificing ~10% of pupils because they have a hard time moving in lockstep, not because they are unable to learn.
Learning a concept is not the same as memorization. It is funny the solution is to present information in as many styles as possible disproves a learning style preference. When you ask people "picture an apple in your head. From 1 - 10 with 10 being as clear as real life how well can you see that imagined apple?" You will get wildly different answers. Mind's eye seems to depend on the person, just People's tendencies to self vocalize or have music stuck in their head. Multimodal is definitely better because it increases the probabilistic nature of learning.
I never thought of learning styles during my education. What I did notice: I always did better when teachers where passionate about the subject and in turn made the classes more interesting. It didn't even matter how easy or strict, how likeable or dislikeable the teacher was. It just worked for me and had a drastic effect on my grades.
Agree with you. If the presentation is interesting, then I was ready to accept any style. I think the successful learning is more about skillful communication between the teacher and the students rather than learning styles.
This right here should be thought about so much more. The two classes I’ve taken thus far in college that I really enjoyed and felt like I learned a lot from were the two taught by teachers who were well incorporated into the subject and loved their work.
100% agreed seeing another person be so unabashedly passionate about a subject is magnetic to me and instantly makes me many more time interested and focused on what they have to say.
I dare say that, the so-called 'learning styles' reveal less about how people learn, and more about what medium tends to spark their curiosity. Some like to read, others prefer narrated video. Both mediums can provide equal amounts of learning but, depending on the individual, one will be more engaging than the other. Perhaps 'Learning Styles' should instead be called 'Preferred Medium of Engagement".
I’ve heard learning styles now referred to as learning preferences. The difference being that preferences change in different contexts and over time vs. something you’re born with that doesn’t change.
Yeah this is what I thought during the video. I reflected on my own experience and realised I don't particularly learn better using any one method, but I know doing things and watching videos engages me more than just simply reading or listening.
Best teachers are those who engage and excite students about the material and use multi-media presentation without boring people or overloading or underloading them.
I interviewed a lot of very good teachers - almost all were good storytellers and used humour in their teaching. It didn’t matter how they lectured (or didn’t lecture). It seems in a non scientific perspective that what mattered is their in classroom charisma.
Robin and B X both say it well. I call it cranking the fun machine. Charisma and humor both depend on correct loading, which avoids both boredom and overwhelm, only possible when the teacher is tuned in to the feedback, which comes in all forms. And you have to engage to get any feedback at all. Hilarity is a dependable feature of a good dynamic. Hook them. Lead them to surprise and delight. Rinse. Repeat.
I has this exact experience in my classes. A student told me 'I'm a visual learner, so I don't understand anything when you explain things verbally". He pigeonholed himself and disengaged completely because of the "style" they told him.
Nah just tell them it is 5 thousand miles north of the south pole and 12 thousand south of the north pole and 60 thousand west of the Philippines they will know exactly where its at that way.
Sorry, but I Do learn way faster by observing visual information in combination with text. An image helps a lot to remember stuff... Am I a visual learner: well I learn faster and with more ease.
@@engelsseele2 That may actually just be a matter of what you're used to. After all, I can completely relate those numbers to eachother in any other context and they give in fact a way better picture of the relation of one place to another than does a map, simply because just visually gauging seems to be very inaccurate, let alone the fact that maps distort A LOT due to projections, so learning the size of Russia by looking at a map is quite literally the WORST thing you can do, because its apparent size on a map is like twice its actual size.
This is why self learning is much more powerful. If you are motivated to figure something out, you will learn more by investigating on your own terms than sitting in a room bored with your mind wandering trying to abosrb a topic you didn’t know you were interested in
Yes. Especially today with RUclips, Khan Academy, and many other online ways to learn which was barely possible 10 years ago and not really possible 20 years ago. But also motivation eventually burns out, at least for some parts of what you want to learn and you will need to create artificial deadlines to accomplish anything - aka SMART goals. Khan academy structures learning in such a way that you can stick to the plan for a long time, without the need for additional motivation or structure. But google search, youtube and other raw sources - you have to create your own structure and deadlines. Like right now I'm supposed to work on my 3D modelling project with no deadline and I'm instead stretching my breakfast time with RUclips lol
@@artemaung5274 The motivation burnout is relatable. But when you run out of motivation, don't panic. It's like struggling to get out of quick sand. You have a lifetime left before you give up on everything.
That is a critical flaw in the video. Learning and understanding are different. Understanding a diagram is different from being able to do it a year later. People have different "understanding" styles, and learning is fixing it in your memory to make it yours through time.
Musical instruments and learning; thinking about music you are learning increases your ability to play it on an instrument. 2weeks without an instrument BUT thinking about playing on that instrument will speed the ability to play any tune on an instrument. I.e get it in your head
Yeah, like he said "Learning Styles" is probably more a personal preference. Like i am personally fascinated by animations of mechanical interactions, but they alone probably wont help me learn how a combustion engine works without a written or spoken explanation of whats happening. Likewise i also prefer to look up text-based tutorials on things i immediately want to learn in, say, photoshop, than watching a youtube tutorial. Despite myself believing that im more of a "visual learner".
I took this VARK test in high school, and as a student who didn’t perform well, I was SOO excited to find out my learning style. I scored the exact same in all categories... seems like that wasn't the reason for my struggle. I realized that once I started taking online classes in college, I learned WAY better when I wasn't around my peers. I would make funny faces, talk out loud, gasp!, yell "what!?!," stick my tounge out, lay on the floor, walk around the room, etc. Not that I needed to have a classroom that allowed me to learn this way... but I needed to have no one else watch me learning this way. I love having a real instuctor, but not other students watching me. Now, I just simulate this by sitting at the front of the class, right in front of the teacher. No one sits in the front. Its always open. ❤
Also depends whether you right or left brain dominant, tactile or like moving, lot of factors needs to be considered and classroom teaching with more than 15 pupils makes it incredibly difficult.
I think for me I loved when we were doing different types of learning styles, the way of learning is important but I feel like eventually it comes down to implicating students and encourage flexibility. Give them time and enough supports but not too much as not to overwhelm them. I lack structure and I have ADHD so it’s important that things are clear. For example I always noticed that images, mind maps didn’t help me on their own because I don’t understand what exactly we have to learn from them. I think where we get it wrong is that we are not really good at one specific learning style but we can have difficulties with some because of specific disabilities that are often not addressed like bad hearing, bad eyesight, dalton’s vision, dyslexia, etc. I see a flaw in the test you ran, it only uses short term memory and doesn’t apply to things that don’t need to be copied and paste but understood and manipulated
I learned, as an educator, that information needs to be presented multi-modally in order for a lesson to be effective for any one person. Not because there are actually learning styles, but because we need to process information in more than one way to retain it.
I always figured people learn more if you say it- and write it on the white board- and draw a diagram or mime it out- because the more you repeat it the more its retained- I always thought the learning style thing sounded bogus.
exactly right. And if you want to pull it up on a higher note: if this video and this utterance is correct, it means that we can finally put bruners theory of the multiple intelligences to rest. Not to take anything away from anybody, but to kill this PC movement, that is taking over everything these days
So conclusion: HOW you learn depends on WHAT you are learning. It's the subject-at-hand that induces the style of learning, and not the person. You can't learn how to skate by just listening. Revolutionary.
Yes. But I'd add that there is a takeaway that a multi-modal approach is usually stronger than a singular approach. Actual skateboarding is an absolute must. However the skateboarder who watches a few internet tutorials or listens to skateboarding podcasts might improve slightly faster than one who just practices their skateboard.
@@AdamZollo - Multimodal is superior only because it increases the number of ways that information can be stored in the brain. If you treat learning as probabilistic, where any given learning method has a 50% chance of success no matter who you're dealing with, flipping a coin once on a single learning style means only half the students will actually learn the material. Flip it twice, and 75% of the students get the material on the first day. Flip it four times, and 93.75% of students will learn the material completely on the first day. Presenting any given topic with multiple different approaches will maximize learning for purely probabilistic reasons.
@@cerebraldreams4738 From my master studies, it is more than just there being more opportunities to learn or "flipping a coin". It comes down to building a more robust neural schema with more "nodes" if you will. Take two groups and teach 100 kids to spell a word they've never heard before. Let's go with Kaiju. Take 10 minutes to show them all how to spell it and tell them briefly what it means. With the second group, also show them a picture of a few Kaiju within that same 10 minutes period. Wait a day, then test both groups on their spelling of Kaiju. My understanding is that group two will be expected to perform better at the task (spelling "Kaiju") even though they actually wasted some time looking at pictures (which isn't even about spelling). This is not because they "flipped more coins" but rather because they've built a bigger neural schema. In fact, those students may close their eyes and visualize a picture they saw to draw out the memory of the spelling. This is similar to the whole idea of creating a memory home.
When I was a kid i found an owner's manual for a Cessna 172 aircraft. I studied it and studied it, made my own drawings, reread parts, made lists of positions of controls, etc. After a year I was certain I could fly a plane. As luck would have it, a few years later I had the chance and...I couldn't.
The most frustrating part of all of this for me, as a teacher, is knowing that learning styles were already debunked years before I did my teacher training, getting indoctrinated into this system, and now, fifteen years later, still having learning styles show up regularly in my professional development courses, staff meetings, and job interviews. The entire field of education is notorious for quickly jumping on the bandwagon for every new idea about how to teach better but taking generations to be willing to admit when those ideas have turned out not to be correct.
The American School System Is Trash And It Will Continue To Be So Until Someone Does Something Drastic That Will Either Overthrow The Current System Or Force It To Become Better.
If you only teach a single way, you're the problem. At least the learning styles encourage teachers to use multiple methods of explaining the same things.
@@tgamer1510 It is a rather large leap to go from an ideological disagreement with a debunked dogma to the assumption that one who disagrees with the theory of learning styles must therefore only teach in one way. I typically teach any given concept in two ways, and try to vary which ways I use from concept to concept. But the principle behind a learning-styles approach is the idea that each student should be taught each concept according to their own learning style, not multiple learning styles. In some applications of this principle (including most of the studies purporting to support this theory), students are separated into cohorts with shared learning styles, and then exclusively taught according to that learning style. In that format, learning styles do not, as you put it, encourage teachers to use multiple methods of explaining the same things, they encourage a lack of variety in teaching methods -- they encourage teachers to always use the same one method, which not only does not turn out to improve student learning despite supposedly respecting each student's learning style, it also eliminates the well-known benefits of teaching a single concept in multiple ways (a principle with which I think we both agree). Conversely, if the students are not grouped according to learning styles cohorts (as I think is probably the more common case), then the doctrine implies that each concept should be taught not only according to more than one style, but that each concept should be taught numerous times, according to each of however many learning styles one happens to accept as meaningful (one of the principal problems that must be determined before any attempt to apply the doctrine). And while I agree that each new re-explanation according to another learning style would improve learning, each new mode also comes with diminishing returns, and we need to take account of the amount of classroom time that is available to teach any given concept when we really need to be moving on to the next concept. There are an enormous number of ideas floating around about how to improve student learning, each of which takes time. Or, as a compromise, we can try to engage all of the learning modalities in a single explanation; from an ideological perspective, this is liable to be a poor compromise, since it may not allow any of the students to fully engage with the topic according to their own learning styles -- not that this matters, of course, since the learning styles are a myth anyway -- but from a practical perspective, this also requires considerably more time, some of which occurs in class and would therefore slow down class progress, but a great of additional time is also required to plan lessons of this kind. And whatever expectations we might have about the amount of time teachers should spend planning their lessons, we are forced to acknowledge that there are ultimate limits dictated by the number of hours in a day. I would rather use what limited time I have available for each concept using methodologies that bring greater returns. In no other field that I know of is it a virtue to continue blindly adhering to debunked hypotheses.
@@MusiMasterJam I didn't bother reading your entire reply because I noted that you said I made an assumption when in fact I didn't. I merely said "If you only teach a single way, you're the problem" I never said you did this, nor does my statement imply that's what I was trying to say. I mean it's not really debunked, until you do any testing on a larger or at least better scale. A few hundred similarly educated people in the trial here cannot accurately represent entire populations.
@@tgamer1510 Point taken. Though I would note that the literature debunking learning styles is extensive. Willingham, D., E. Hughes, and D. Dobolyi (2015), "The Scientific Status of Learning Styles Theories", Teaching of Psychology, Vol. 42(3), 266-71 cites nearly a dozen reviews of the literature spanning from as early as the late 1970s to as recently as the mid 2010s demonstrating the failure to support the theory (see especially p. 267). The conclusion that learning styles are now debunked rests by no means on a small body of evidence.
There is a saying I am fond of. If it didn't hurt - you didn't learn anything. While not true in all scenarios I definitely see a LOT of people who aren't learning simply because their actions did not yield a suitable pain response.
We're told the public isn't interested in education, but then a video on learning styles proves extremely popular. Conclusion: people crave education that delivers!
When I saw the views, I just assumed this was like a week old, but I looked at the time after seeing your comment. It's only been up for 5hrs, and it's 3/4 of the way to a million views already.💫 It's a relevant topic. In school, I was frustrated with how the material we had access to in middle school was divided up based on "learning style," which meant nobody had access to all of the explanatory information. It seemed counterproductive when we could've instead learned to share, providing everyone with all the necessary material.
I remember in school, being asked straight up to pick one of the VARK learning styles that we thought were best for us. I recall being very conflicted and uncertain choosing, because I knew that my skillset was based heavily on music and sounds (I now have a degree in Sound Engineering) so at that time, i felt obligated to pick Auditory. But honestly, I felt like I could learn from any style, as long as the teacher was engaging and the content was interesting. I did very poorly in high school classes, barely graduating with passing marks. But in college, I made Dean's list every semester. I don't think it had to do with learning style, but rather the subject matter was interesting and relevant to what i enjoyed.
Awful! It’s such a tickbox exercise for schools. I remember we were asked to do the VARK test to see which one we were (we weren’t told it was VARK, just a test and we thought it would put us into “set” classes!!). We weren’t given enough time and most people hadnt finished. We were told to hand it in anyways so most people just ticked random boxes for the next few questions (in hope of getting more marks) which would have skewed the results. It’s only after we were told it was VARK and realised oh crap
Oh putting music to anything helps pretty much everyone. To this day I still recite poems and songs from like School House Rock to help me remember stuff 😂 it stays with you forever
My school made us pick one and plan every aspect of our studying according to it. We were even tested on what strategies worked better for different learning styles. It was so confusing and I didn't have any idea what was going on
Most people probably think that visual learning is taking a book or video home and learning there at their own pace, instead of being in a noisy classroom where there is a lot of pressure to perform. For instance, if a person feels uncomfortable at the lecture, and understands everything much better by reading the study book later, he might think it is because he is a visual learner. So they don't even know the definition and mix up forced socializing (being around other people while learning something), pressure from other students or teacher and the learning style. It might be so because usually different learning styles have different levels of socializing, for instance if you call yourself a hands on learner, you might like having one on one time with teacher, them showing you what to do and then can finish it on your own. At the same time, verbal learning often includes being in front of many people when answering the teacher, the pace is dictated by the teacher and everybody is watching you. In fact, this video made me feel uncomfortable, because I can't relax when the other person is there, I'm thinking more about doing something wrong and I can't turn those pages on my own to develop a strategy or look at something for longer. Also, I find it hard to switch between socializing and learning. I don't think either of those methods were what people think of when they talk about visual learning - seeing something on their own, not being distracted and not being disturbed by the other person talking when they switch their mind into seeing in pictures instead of words.
as an education major, i dealt with classmates who when confronted with the fact that there is no evidence to show individuals have significant differences in their own learning style, actively rejected the idea because it’s so rooted in our philosophies. luckily, after we learned the real science of it everyone was excited to use it correctly. multimodality extends beyond visual and written/oral language. the most fun lesson i’ve ever done with students had them acting out the life cycle of their research animal in the middle of a big circle of students. it was so impressive to see they remembered things like seahorses linking their tails and my favorite, a mother manatee pushing her newborn baby out of the water for its first breath. i could have cried. learning can be so fun sometimes.
My grade 8 science project, back in the late 80's, was on learning styles. My teacher was shocked and surprised when I submitted my project idea. All my subjects were my classmates. Over a span of a couple weeks I tested their comprehension of certain short stories, pictures, and videos; through visual, audio, and reading. When the science fair day came, my booth wasn't the most popular with any of the other kids, but with all the school teachers and parents... they loved it. I remember the results of my project was inconclusive because I tested each student individually with each individual method of learning. No one method of learning is better than another, but combining multiple methods of learning is where results would be seen. But I ran out of time to combine methods of learning before the project was due.
in the 80's as an 11 year old you knew more about learning than professionals did. the new psycology suggest that humans learn best when mulltiple learning methods are used. nice.
This would explain why many people, including me, believe RUclips videos explain things better than school did. Videos have the advantage of being every style at once and edited down to be only a few minutes. Few teachers, if any, can replicate that kind of effectiveness in an in-person lecture.
Another factor is how you are seeking out the information on your time, at your pace. You're not slapped down into a classroom and told "get used to this place cause you're gonna be here almost every day of your life for the next 12 years or more" when you watch these videos. You see them in your recommended or subscription and go "nice, I'll watch that." On top of this, you can watch at any rate you want. If you miss something, you can easily go back like 15 seconds and listen again without having social pressure of raising your hand and requesting another explanation, or pause the video altogether and come back whenever you want if you're losing focus. If the person in the video is too slow, you can speed the video playback as fast as your internet allows (I have an extension that lets me go beyond the 2x speed, audio still playing even at 8x), while a teacher that talks too slow is just something you have to deal with, in person. Ultimately, online content has a massive advantage over traditional classes. The problems tend to form when it comes to how you'd be able to make sure all kids are getting the same general education without a classroom, where attendance is mandatory and standardized tests are in place, even if they're horribly executed.
and the amount of work for a youtube video: I teach 28 lessions per week at a public school. I cant pour 50 hours of work into a 15 minute sequence. Of course the youtube videos can easily have a much higher quality.
Which is a good strategy if you are stressed and tired today. If you always are tired and stressed you should adress this before embarking on learning. It is totally worth it: learning is the most mind altering drug out there ;-) And how will you "cheat" the laws of nature by near-magic like mobile phones, penicillin and robots if you don't know the rules?
I finally understand why I could never figure out my learning style. I was so confused because I preferred different things for different concepts, and preferred combining them together 😂
I think people choose visual because the information is often presented at a whole whereas auditory information is presented in series. The latter punishes momentary lack of attention harder.
Yes Visual is kind of dumb, because, text is visual, pictures are visual. your own hand eye coordination is visual. I'm just saying. And as you said there is always some sort of auditory element, when a teacher explains a concept. I follow the this style when learning a new skill, ; (Look/Listen, Read, Do, Review (repeat as needed). Listen to the lecture/watch it and make notes for any specific information that you need to pay special attention to, then read the material in full , then practice the material and review the material as needed.
Not entirely true. The visual presents the information as a whole, but you have a search for details and get interested in the thing to get some understanding. While the text will dissect the information for you and go step by step as to what it represent. You might not be able to understand a somewhat complicated graphic just by looking at it, but once you have the narrative around it, all it's meaning take form. This is basically what Veritasium says in it's video.
Teacher in training: I took a class that argued that learning styles dont exist--people are better equipped to learn when they are given materials that keep their attention and engagement, and when new information is built upon and connected to prior information.
Since you are a teacher in training: is that the common view these days? (that learning styles is a myth). The concept seems to be so common that I presume the change in perspective is somehow new. Could you comment on that? Cheers.
Same (15 years ago), but then two years ago I was working on my masters and the professor assigned work on matching learning styles (I wrote a paper debunking it with plenty of sources and discussing the use of multiple modes and matching mode to content. I failed the assignment.)
I recently finished my education degree )~3 years ago) and would say that this is a fairly common view. However I also believe that the different “learning styles” help me categorize my teaching and help me think about teaching in different ways.
There is one element to this that was not addressed: as a teacher, it does not really matter if the RCT said VARK doesn't work, once your student already believes that it does. The placebo effect is strong and it affects other important aspects of learning like comfort and motivation. So it often pays off to go along with peoples preferences to an extent. It is good to know that it doesn't hold any water though, so you can focus on more important things about the classroom rather than trying to inventory everyone's own thing.
I kinda get what you're saying, but I don't think lying or pretending that something exists and matters is a healthy way to maintain interest from your students. Especially when it could be harmful to make your students think they're bad at learning in a certain way when they are not.
The biggest thing is that people learn what they like, what they’re interested in, or at the very least what they’re motivated to learn. We’re also very social learners as a species, which is why babies can’t learn from videos and books, they NEED human interaction (which can also include videos/books). It’s also true that children learn best from and with other children, which is why PLAY is so critically important for kids, especially young kids
Absolutely. Ppl learn better and more efficiently, if interested in the subject. For some neurotypes (like ADHD and autistic) it can be almost impossible learning things that the individual finds uninteresting or that there is no 'good' reason to learn. But the social learning part, doesn't seem to be true for everyone, autistics especially, can be quite distracted by the presence of other ppl and oftentimes learn more efficiently when they do solo research, at their own pace. We have plenty of examples of little autistic children teaching themselves to read, because they wanted to read something specific or learning a foreign language, solely from watching tv. I find this highly interesting. :-)
One of the best things I heard when I was learning about teaching was this: 'If your students become bored at any point, you'll lose them. Keep them alert. Keep them engaged. The rest will follow."
Exactly. If you can get students to be focused for 1 hour each day, 80% of the time that student will be successful, with or without homework completion. They’ll memorize all of the content without studying at all. It’s hard to do that though when a teacher has 30+ students in a class. Like I’ve always been interested in math, physics, and biology, so I’d have laser focus for that hour each day, and I’d almost get perfect scores even though I rarely studied or did homework. But in classes like history and English I can barely hold my focus and I’d struggle to keep good grades.
@@bigsmall2842 A singer, sports figure, talkshow host, or news commentator can do it for millions at a time. If the teacher can't figure it out for 30, then perhaps the problem is a little more obvious.
that's actually a great thing to tech future teachers but each student has their own pace I can't deal with repetition so I did best in my final year of high school or professional school full throttle and exams back to back, just lean back and enjoy the ride
Idk. It's a decent sentiment but I'm seeing it play out depressingly in practice. Now I'm seeing it spun as "oh some of your students aren't participating in the lesson? It's because you didn't make it engaging enough. Yeah I don't care that you spent 3 extra hours planning an escape room, lack of participation = boring lesson on your part." Orrrrr maybe it's that I teach high school math and the majority of my students come to me not knowing that 3x means 3 times x. Or how to plot a point. Or how to square a number. Meanwhile I'm supposed to be teaching them to square binomials a month into the year. And instead of being allowed time to get them caught up, I have to grind out new material they've never been prepared for, some of which is mathematically useless and I would never teach if given a choice (looking at you high school geometry proofs), every day to be able to give them district tests on time. The schools with low engagement, which are high poverty schools where teachers already have a high stress workload, are the ones hit with this sentiment the hardest. It also creates this false expectation that learning should be inherently fun. It isn't, and that's ok and our students need to know that's ok. As a millennial, I had a rude awakening getting to adulthood and realizing the baby boomer fantasies of the American workforce I was brought up with were a lie. I worry we're doing the same thing with Gen Z. Giving them the expectation that if it's not engaging to them, it's not worth their time. What I have found is that relationships really are everything. The best way to get a kid to solve an equation isn't to create an interpretive dance re-enactment or some nonsense. It's also, very sadly to me, is not showing them how it's applicable in real life. (straight from "math is uselessssssss" to "ok but I'm never going to care enough to actually do that cause that's doing too much" 😞) It's getting them to trust and respect you enough that they understand it's important. I'd love to attain more than just respectful complaince from the majority of my students, but the problem isn't a lack of engaging lessons, it's the system that values a checklist of standards learned rather than actual growth. And like a whole laundry list of problems in education (like compensation for teaching being abysmal enough that we can't staff middle school math positions, and so have to hire people with no math background who literally don't know how to do high school math, just for one.) It's like my parents pointing the finger at American workers for our current unemployment rates when the actual problem is the system that allows people to work full time and still not earn enough to pay rent and know you'll be eating every day. Sorry this became a rant 😅 TL;DR telling teachers to make lessons more engaging wrongfully shifts the blame for problems in our education system to teachers and hurts students in the process.
The more I think about these learning styles the more I realise that it is a combination of all three that helps me and it depends largely on the subject. Reading an entire book about a dry subject would be boring to me without visuals - so I would probably prefer watching a documentary or looking at pictures. But I would rather read a manual than watch a 30 minute RUclips video on how to do something because I can skip the things I already know in a manual or speed read - especially if its a hands on task like cooking and I already know the basics and how certain ingredients behave under certain conditions so I don't need anyone to show me from scratch. Equally, some subjects require me to throw in auditory aids - I am not that good at Maths and just seeing a formula doesn't help me if I can't discuss it with another person and have them talk me through the logic. And sometimes I actually need to do something myself rather than learn the theory of a subject as only the theory will likely go over my head unless I can touch it and feel it and walk myself through the process. Unfortunately the education system often has one or more elements missing (eg University and school is largely textbook based and you are not really exposed to a real working environment, online courses you don't have anyone to talk the subject through with, learning by doing is ok if you work in a lower skilled job but if a company only employs people and trains them on the job sometimes theoretical training is missing which could fill in the gaps). (P.S.: I have ADHD and you have to keep me entertained if you want me to learn anything...lol). So I believe some learning styles are better if you already have basic knowledge and some are better if you start completely from scratch but overall it's a combination of all three.
The thing he is getting at is this: the 'best' learning approach is dictated by the MATERIAL, not by some presumed personal style. You are certainly correct, for electronic circuits, that subject begs for diagrams - but for example, in teaching about rhetoric or speech-craft, you would not want to just read the words from a speech from MLK, the best learning approach would be to listen to his voice. (thinking further on this MLK idea, you might think a visual movie of him giving a speech might add still more.... but probably not, that could actually take away from your learning goal which might be to understand the power of spoken language - so the best learning approach might be to close your eyes and just listen). Let the nature of the materials dictate the best style. And for sure, several styles/methods together will probably be even better. But for example do NOT put lots of text on a PPT slide when you are going to say the same words. That overloads the working memory, with its two channels of input, auditory and visual - instead utilize one channel, auditory, with all your narration words, and utilize the visual channel with either just a few keywords (almost more as illustrations than as text) or better have a visual representation (Illustration, animation, picture) of what the narration is all about. That way you respect the working memory and get maximal complimentary learning approach benefits.
This is addressed in the video. For various domains, it makes sense to incorporate media appropriate for the domain. If learning geography, it helps to visualize with maps. This is not inconsistent at all with the overall premise in general.
What this leaves out is the value of Interest and engagement in learning. Gauging performance on a single test won’t show whether or not being forced to learn in a way that doesn’t match your preference long-term affects your desire for lifelong learning etc.
My dad always told me since I started school like 15-16 years ago, to read out my text book loud, then my eyes would see it, my mouth would say it, my ears would hear it, and my brain would process it; then try to either repeat or write down what I remember so my hands will express the information too. 5 different methods of learning at once, for the maximum information intake, and since all senses are focused on the task, less distractions as well. My dad is really wise I should listen to him more lol.
Using a pen is also a game changer. Sooo many signals run to and from the brain from the tactile pen and your eyes focus on the writing tip. Automatic concentration!
@@tectopic That was the key to school being easy for me. If I didn't do it - if I just looked material over or just discussed it with friends - nothing came out of my pen in the exam.
Love, love, love, this video. I taught high school biology for 15 years and you hit the nail on the head. It's not the student that needs to be taught with a specific style, it's the topic. Not only do teachers stress themselves out trying to present topics like photosynthesis in a kinesthetic way, but it probably doesn't make any sense for them to do so. Worse yet, some topics that are easy to grasp with any delivery mechanism get hours of class time devoted to them because they fit in well with a hands on lab, while difficult to understand topics are neglected because there is no easy to to present them in multiple modalities. VARK is basically gospel in educational training, hopefully this video leads to a better understanding of how we approach these modalities.
A fun problem is when you are asked to include multiple modalities for a lesson plan to be good enough for evaluation. It isn't just that it is gospel; sometimes this learning theory is required.
As a teacher, I do my best to use all the modes. My undergraduate degree is in psychology and I understood this principle, and many others connected to this, beforehand. It’s incredibly difficult to change the education system as “intuition” is a frequently used method for strategies. Teachers genuinely want to do the best by their students but often lack the training to best direct their effort.
A teacher of mine had our class take a learning style test, and mine was split evenly between the three options. Visual, hearing, and hands-on. All I know is that I’m a slow learner.
U are ok dude. The sistem is too broken, to be effective in learning in any way. If u are learning something, that u are very interest with, and have it right before ur class eyes, and u have patient teacher, have the paitience and the willing to answear the questions of the students (and yours), u will suddenly become "fast learner" dont u think?
@@zvetanzvetanov7228 Personally, I may be deeply passionate about my current studies, it still takes me hours long to review and study the content of a single 2-hours-long course. Admittedly, I tend to get sidetracked a lot.
I've always hated those tests because it told me I was a kinesthetic learner and all my teachers tried to get me to interact with stuff and stopped teaching me like I was a normal person. My grades plummeted so they put me back in my normal teaching
I believe approaching a problem in more then one learning style is the right way to try and understand problems and resolve them. You get different information from the different methods and this can help you cross reference and fill in blanks that using only one style cause.
I think you put it in good words not that you are a visual learner but it foes improve your recall and memory. Because I know I'm not a visual learner but whenever it comes across that I watch something like a photo or video while studying a subject which requires me to memorise it becomes more effective and stays. I just hate colours and highlighters on notes.
@Cassie you are correct. For example, a kinesthetic and/or visual approach to learning a new motor skill such as riding a bike or swimming would most likely produce better outcomes.
@@Basetsnaolebile Research has been done on different “study skills” such as note taking, highlighting, outlines, flashcards ect- long story short- “highlighting” compared to other forms produced the poorest results. Highlighting serves better as a “cueing” mechanism for individuals to return to subject matter later.
Seeing something get done, teaches me, actually doing it, solidifies the knowledge. I believe that would be considered hands-on learning, with a splash of visual.
I am able to read, take notes, and listen to lectures at the same time. I have had teachers/ instructors call me out in classes for doing this until they ask me a question. I would answer to show I am listening and usually was left alone after I answered correctly. It just works for me. Don't unstand it.
Not really, concentration certainly is needed but NOONE can be concentrated at everything, thus there's a "preference" to classify/separate on what's important to what isn't, and usually one of the ways to "increase capacity" of what can be learned is writing things down Or, at least that's how I did/do.. :)
and the ones that learn the best across all subjects tend to be one's that employ learning techniques that are not actively taught by the teacher. This is why vocab is such a poor subject for many kids. not many people will just learn a list of words and definitions even when used in stories. meanwhile if you have multiple activities for each concept, when tested on the material you will see better results. Especially when activities engage more.
I'm in the learning and development department at a manufacturing facility. We used this test in orientation to help for when new hires go to the floor to train. I've been working on shifting us away from the learning style model for a few months now. This video is super helpful!!!
I am a former science teacher. In my experience ALL students learn better when concepts are presented in a variety of ways, and all students learn in a variety of ways. Not only do students lack a dominant learning style, but believing they do can be counter productive, at least for teenagers. It is easy for them to shut off their brains during a lecture because they are not "auditory learners." Of course a good lecture will include visual and other ways of communicating. There is a reason for blackboards.
The most successful strategy I ever saw was a math teacher I had who gave out candy if you were the first person to spot a mistake in her work or the textbook. Engagement was high to say the least...
There is so much pseudoscience in education; it's maddening to be a teacher at times. This doesn't surprise me in the slightest, and god help me for the number of people who believe (because they were enthusiastically taught) that Gardner's multiple intelligences are a meaningful thing.
"While Gardner helpfully expands our notion of intelligence, the psychologist _Robert J. Sternberg_ helpfully distills it again. Rather than eight intelligences, Sternberg’s model proposes three: _analytical, creative, and practical._ Further, unlike Gardner’s theory, Sternberg’s is supported by empirical research." Brown, P. C., L, H., & Mcdaniel, M. A. (2014). _Make it stick : the science of successful learning._ The Belknap Press Of Harvard University Press. P. 148
My personal theory for why learning styles and even things like personality tests exist is that people love categorizing themselves in some type of group. And yes, this is such an INTJ Scorpio Ravenclaw thing to say.
Not only themselves but everything that is around us. It makes life easier but at the same time, less accurate. That's why we have just bunch of colors and we even may argue that this thing is different color than others say - our categories are a bit different. For the same reason there are usually just a few political parties. We just pick the one we think we should be in and ignore the fact that they don't meet our standpoint in some degree.
That makes sense, but there's also the fact that there are phony companies and "education experts" capitalizing on it. I was in adult education, and was sent to a workshop on learning styles, which is something that study after study and research after research have debunked. Yet, many people end in education (especially in adult education and training) without any foundation of the learning sciences, which clearly debunks the learning style nonsense. Furthermore, studies show that many learners show a more efficient learning using methods other than their preferred one.
One of the things my high school taught us was that the more ways you interact with the material you're learning, the better you'll remember it. We were taught to use the Cornell notes system: take your notes, draw doodles for each idea, and then summarize the lecture. I don't know anybody who enjoyed it, but now that I'm in university, I take my notes, take screen grabs of images and diagrams that help explain a concept, and make "summary" note pages every 3-4 weeks (not after every lecture, though). My university tells us repeatedly that the more time we spend engaging with a topic (in any manner), the better our grades will be.
There was a comedy show on PBS that came from the BBC about lectures, professors and students. The professor was in a lecture hall giving his lecture. The camera panned around to show students busily taking notes, with some of them recording the lecture on little cassette recorders. The scene shifted to the next lecture where there were several empty seats where recorders were recording the lecture. Another lecture and about half the seats were empty with recorders recording. Another lecture and the hall was completely devoid of students with nothing but recorders furiously recording the lecture. Finally, the last scene showed the empty lecture hall with all the recorders recording and when the camera swung around to the front, the professor was gone, and a large reel to reel recorder was delivering the lecture.
My daughter took an elective class in 7th and 8th grade. It was all about staying organized and taking notes effectively. She learned how to use the Cornell notes system. While she doesn't do that today, she did take components from it and honed her own style of learning. The experience was beneficial.
I’ve been teaching English to ESL students for years and I’ve seen this happen. I found that being able to talk and share stories that incorporate new information, they learn and remember much more easily than being given a list of vocabulary or grammar rules to learn. It makes learning much faster and more fun if the information has context.
The most helpful thing about VARK in my experience (both learning things myself and helping others learn) is recognizing the different ways we can receive and process information so we can use all of them instead of just focusing on one. For instance, reading about a bike pump AND looking up a graph AND listening to an explanation AND using a bike pump hands-on: Doing all of these together will always be more effective than using only one of the four.
To be honest, I have not ever heard of "VARK" before. But I still found out doing research yourself on a topic instead of relying on given infomations on textbooks or notes yields better results, most likely because I actually get the chance to try things, and you would remember things better if you found a actual need for it (which is why you started the research in the first place). My threory is that most of the things we learn in school are useless to us, and we dont see a need to remember it except for tests. While there might be some demos, it is very obvious that those are engineered. On the other hand, if you do have the chance to use them in real applications, or you need to use them but forgot how to do so, or you have a hard time doing something then found out that you can do that in less then 1/10th of the effort by using a new method, you would certainly remember it.
In my opinion, it will be 100% ineffective if the student is not interested. If there is no interest, no matter what method you use, will be useless. The point of the most proper way of teaching is to make the student interested in what you teach. Personal opinion and experience.
2:59 "How do you know you're a visual learner?" - "I don't, I just assume" This man exhudes self-awareness. Lots could be learned from his well-exercised sincerity.
You know geography is not just pinpointing a country or a capital on a map right ? Kudos to you if you can understand the concept of globalization or gentrification with just a map rather than an auditory explanation.
There are many false myths that we have been taught since we were children and they continue to be passed down generation after generation. This video is great, great content as always!
I was told blood was blue (Edit: and turned red when exposed to the air). When I was idk 10 or 11 I was thinkin wouldn't there be some transition that I could see and then they said it was just the vein that was blue.
The measure for learning was memorization and performing well on tests. I would argue that other learning approaches provide a larger context to the material, which improves someones capacity for problem solving and innovation. But this isnt an important skill set, mostly we just need people with the technical knowledge to follow the perscribed steps, go through this checklist, get the computer to complete the design and engineering for you, or watch concrete being poured.
🍎I agree with the video's premise that all available modalities should be offered and explored in order to help enhance learning but Google is not a good search engine. It's a mass surveillance apparatus that violates people's right to privacy and security.
As a teacher there's only one style that actually matters: ask students to explain what you just exposed. That will force them to engage all their senses, memory, focus and vocabulary. Which means that they will remember a lot more after time passed by
@Taichi Villaruel lol you basically just said the same thing OP said. you’re helping students engage with the material in different ways. they’re still recalling information in new ways. “explain to me what we just talked about” isn’t literal all the time. your teaching methods are the exact same just in different styles and avenues. you’re not doing anything different than what the comment said. introducing material, exploring it, and applying it
I agree with you. When someone can explained what they learned, it’s the best way to retain and understand the information. I feel that this really helps me.
No please. My classmates are really scared when a teacher asking students to explain like that. Ended with being insisted. Teacher not satisfied, students avoid that teacher. It makes gap between students and teacher
In school I had the topic "learn learning" which covered those types. Later on in my training as a careworker I had this topic again. This time my teacher told me that we all have a prefered learning style (one of the types), but we learn best if we use all types. He called it canels. If we trigger all our canels (visual, audotory, read/write and kinesthetic) we learn the best. Its the combinations that helps to manifest the input given to you in your brain. And a little extra: We had a fifth type - communication. Learning best in groups and talking with others about it.
Thank you! I’m a teacher and I know student learning is waaay more complicated than learning styles! Motivation, alertness/tiredness, emotional state, dynamics between students, relationships etc all play a role
I would suggest that being exposed to all styles of learning helps students to become more skilled in each of them. Obviously, toddlers are not reading/writing learners until they learn to read and write. Listening skills can be improved with guidance, as can visual observation skills and hands-on interaction skills. Tailoring one's teaching too much in the direction of kids' already-established preferences retards their development of the other learning skills.
@@Aname550 I'm asian, i also don't convinced this style. Exercise and study like hell like the rest of asian and you're good to go. The most good strategy is to remember back what you learned before.
Experience is your best teacher. Theoretical learning can never be as efficient as learning by experience. Like programming, you are better off doing coding than just listening to lecture and watch some tutorials. I also find it better to play it with, like test and stuff.
I think everyone is missing the most crucial and secret ingredient: Having the intention to learn. If you just sit back, let the information get thrown at you to see what sticks, you're going to retain less than if you're actively trying to retain it. He started to show this with people that have developed some sort of learning or memory strategy. Those people have the intention to learn.
Yes, any teachers know that motivation is the key ingredient in learning. People looking for "visual learning" are those who feel more motivated to engage in visual education material, which doesn't necessarily mean that they are inherently better at it. But it's likely what is needed to keep them engaged. Disappointed to see this crucial point was not addressed in the video.
Yes, but there are some people who have the intention to learn but can't come up with good methods to do it. Sure, the people who actively apply learning methods probably do want to learn, but we shouldn't dismiss those who want to learn but just don't know how to.
That's the reason why I don't like biology and physics. It's just that I am not able to process it while maths is more like what I am made for. Geography seems hard to me "literally" but visually and physically it's much better and that probably the reason why I was able to learn all the countries and their locations.
I had a student that missed class frequently, he was learning about the plumbing contract business from his family. He was learning skills that he could never get in school because he was actually applying what he was learning. I would list him as being present to keep the authorities off him and his family. He is now a very successful plumbing contractor.
I've noticed that for me it depends on what I'm learning. For instance with science or math based subjects I seem to retain and analyze more information by visualizing and history or origin based subjects, I seem to retain and analyze information by reading. Here's the thing, most of my learning I've done alone, meaning self-taught. The advantage of being self-taught is I learn at a pace that suits me and I can readily change up the way I'm digesting information. The disadvantage is I have a tendency to not invest too much time and effort in subjects I care little or not at all. Informative video.
I had an excellent, and very intense mathematical statistics professor for whom varying teaching style *WAS* his teaching style. I recall, one day for an hour long lecture, he came in and wrote notes and provided examples and proofs, and he never said a single word. In another day, he switched his handwriting to beautiful, perfect cursive. He was a bizarre teacher, but pushed me to the absolute limit. Great prof!
i had an excellent east asian mother. today every adult in my family is an accomplished expert in their field and not a single one regrets our mother's teaching style that kept us away from a loser's fate of making
My math teacher that I once had, was able to teach me math by introducing visual, kinetic examples along with text on those things. Whilst explaining them audibly. It was the only way for me to properly learn math, we'd usually learn math just by looking in a textbook. I wish I had him more
What I learnt is that I just can't be taught by a teacher, I have to teach myself. I have a specific way of learning and it's not normal so whenever a teacher would explain something whether it was verbally or even writing it down I just didn't get it but if I went home and googled it and did tons of research within a couple hours it would make sense. Personally I think the reason I didn't get it is because a knowledgeable person can go way too into depth about a subject they know well rather than remembering the person they are reaching doesn't have the same knowledge. It's why I struggled so hard in school to get good grades. I always thought I was dumb but really I just think a bit differently. Now I do really well, I just found what worked for me.
As a 20 year educator, I’ve found that teaching students through a variety of “styles” keeps them engaged. Most importantly, exposing learners to a variety of modalities helps learners learn the process of learning. The key to education is finding the hook for your age of learners.
i'm a pressure learner, i only learn school material when there's severe stress and doubts about my future imposed on me
strong emotion melts the learning material together
Facts
based
Probably more a memorizer than a learner, then.
Looool nice
As an educator, I was taught learning styles theory, and we were told to try to incorporate some or all of them in the lessons. The result was teaching the same material in a few different ways so that you'd reach everyone. The actual outcome was the material was presented multiple times, so the repeated exposure through a variety of styles helped everyone remember better. Don't just teach visual learners visually and kinesthetic learners with experiments; teach everyone with everything.
Share this with other teachers
Répétition is key for me as well
I'd agree except this bores the hell out of those of us who got it the first time and don't wanna spend a week on one thing.
@@Wally03 They are probably quite busy teaching, and teaching well by the sounds of things. Perhaps the education policy makers, who are not teachers, and are much more influenced by political trends would be better to deal with this. Perhaps you could write a letter to your local representative?
I've been saying that for years with a lot of pushback from older teachers.
id say whether im interested in the topic or not matters more than how its presented to me
Damn never thought i'd see you here
hi user
I agree with you that interest is very important, but I disagree that will lead to learning by itself. You can be deeply interested in a subject, but if no one presents that information to you, or at least in a intelligible way, then you will never understand no matter how much you want to know. This is excluding experimenting things and discovering it yourself. Having an interest is important nonetheless. If your teacher is presenting the material poorly, your innate interest will lead to you seeking out that information elsewhere. But that other source of information still need to present it in a understandable way. If you aren't interested, that won't happen. Interest just means you are more willing to find alternative forms of presentation.
I disagree. I think that if you find a good enough presenter, they would find ways to hook you in, no matter the topic
A good presentation will make you feel interested - that's what a good presentation is. That's why channels like Veritasium and Vsauce are so popular
In school I found I learned best by writing things down because during tests i could remember myself writing it down. I don't think I have that learning style, I just think I was creating memories to look back on during my exams.
It's called reconciliation of memories.
Yeah, that's a big reason why one of my teachers insists on us taking handwritten notes rather than typed notes, cause handwritten notes are supposed to make a stronger memory than typing
That’s actually true! If you wrote things down besides reading them and all the others things you make a better connection in your brain so you can recall it better! Just like he said; a combination of different styles is the best way to learn
That’s really explains why some of favorite teachers are those that actually wrote everything out on the whiteboards
Notes is the “reading/writing” learning style. Writing notes IS your learning style.🤦♂️
My learning style is: being interested in the subject.
same
Yup. There you go.
If I was interested in something actually useful, I would have a PhD half way through high school😂
More teachers are using student choice and self selection of materials. They'll simplify this method to its detriment, too!
bad strategy at school.
I recall a teacher telling me he practised the martial art of "Tell-show-do", he further explained that his students learned best when first he told them about the subject matter, then he showed them a demonstration of the material, and finally got them to practise it themselves. This essentially covered all the perceived learning styles and helped everyone in his classes learn fairly uniformly.
Sounds like PPP (Present, Practice, Production).. Anyway, all different names for approaches that may or may not be scientifically based but have varying degrees of merit.
So sorry you were exposed to such a doctrinaire fool. I hope you managed to escape his insular and myopic clutches.
Yea but now supposedly that doesn't work they really push group work which is stupid!
@@brucedavis3816 Group work is emphasized because if kids are interested in each others' outcomes and tutor each other, then you functionally end up with more than one teacher and more classes than what the subject allotted, which helps somewhat cover the major weakness of trying to teach 20+ students at the same time on a tiny budget of hours per week.
Tell me and I will forget.
Show me and I will remember.
Involve me and I will learn.
-Benjamin Franklin
"How do you know that you're a visual learner?"
"I don't. I just assume."
I hope that guy knows just how perfect and precise that answer is.
Yeah. I came here to make a similar comment. And by 'similar' I mean I was going to refer to him as "an absolute science gangster".
@@andyjohnson4907 Well, that's the technical term. 👍🏽
Google trying to enforce that we are all unique in some way that gives us benefits. Critical race theory whatnot. It seemed like veritasium started to backpedal on that idea though when he revealed that people employ memory strategies rather than simply being genetically dominant
seriously loved that
What a BAMF
I'm a teacher who just discovered your channel. When you asked those people what Learning Style they were I imagined what I'd say in that position and I would have said "all of them - I'm a multi-modal learner". Then you went on and talked about multimodality so I take some solace in the fact that I am doing my best for my students in following this approach.
It's about engagement, students learn better when their attention is maintained.. most people say they're visual learners because that's the easiest sense to actively engage in learning..
Especially without distraction.
Whatchu know about rolling down in the deep
Yep, entirely about engagement.
I totally agree, the worst teachers I've had, mostly didn't care and just went on to give the class and hoped we copied everything
@@Dhrakhan when your brain goes numb you can call that mental freeze
I'm a clarity learner. I learn better when the information is clearer.
Exactly
@Dyanosis not true at all 😂😂 maybe you’re just dumb. Plenty of courses I had ZERO interest in yet retained clear information ☠️
isn't that literally everyone?
Agreed :3
Let me summarize the corse in one word
"I prefer to learn about things that I want to learn" - best learning style
Yes
Natural curiosity makes you go ahead and find any source to learn about. It doesn't matter if text, visual, kinestethic or auditive. Everything will do and the whole mixture of those is great to learn anything
How to fail In school 101
one of the best comment i ever seen
Autodidactic 😉
I feel like this quiz heavily relies on a persons ability to recall from memory rather than understanding and learning the answers, going home and sleeping, coming back tomorrow and still being able to know it because you learnt it rather than just you remembered. Memory fades but knowledge doesnt
Knowledge is still a kind of memory, so it fades too if unused for too long, though real knowledge fades much much slower than memorization.
Knowledge is stored in memory. Your concept is flawed.
This is the biggest and funniest stand up comedy i have ever seen. Such good comedian
The best way to learn something is being actually interested in the topic.
Or to memorize every problem.
So by extension, the best teacher is one who manages to make/keep their students interested.
Yes
Absolutely.
Also, if your job compels you to learn about it...
@@elmz Yesss . That's it
"how do you know you're a visual learner"
"I don't, I just assumed."
This guy learns
That man was just straight to the point.
Built different
wait, did he just assumed his learning style?
He had a hypothesis that he was a visual learner and he was ready to test it out.
@@Segovaxxx better than assuming a gender. Safer too.
Interesting. My learning style is: slow.
Lol can relate so bad.
Lol! Mine too!
Lol me too 😂
Slow, but detailed learning, my friend.
Me brain in study or in exam
Pls help
My brain when playin WT/WoT
LT go here, defend this flank, kill that R3 T20, arty annoying LT kick their ass, flank enemy is weak and cant spread tank anymore, rush he need to reload
My sister was part of a huge, 50 State VARK study. The largest and most conclusive study ever done. The conclusion at which they arrived was this: switching up teaching styles helps all children remain engaged in their studies. Not that e eryone has a learning style. The study concluded that everyone has all learning styles.
I find that the best learning style is the desire to learn. Often when introducing a new topic or subject, teachers need to draw that desire out, and then the student will be motivated to learn. One of the biggest questions I often hear in class as a student is "why do we need to learn this?" If the teacher cannot answer that in a satisfying way, the student will be less likely to retain what they learn.
This is amplified in ADHD students. Studies have found that ADHD students are under represented in engineering, but run circles around "normal" students in engineering when they are taught with a stronger emphasis on intuition based learning and applying the learning in a gratifying way. People with ADHD are incapable of staying focused if they do not see relevance in what they are learning. IMO, there are a lot more people with undiagnosed ADHD than realized. I don't even think its a disorder, just a different type of cognition. The systems in place simply don't facilitate this learning style because they just want to have students memorize cookie cutter problems for exams and get them pushed through as quickly as possible.
Autistic until proven otherwise here. This is so true. If someone doesn't want to learn, or doesn't see the value in what they're learning, they simply won't, because they don't care. My preferred learning style is games. Probably so is everyone's. If you make a game out of it, kids will remember things better. Teachers be like, "why can y'all memorize these rap songs but not the periodic table of the elements?" Because it's not fun and they don't care. They don't see the value in learning the periodic table of the elements beyond not wanting to get in trouble with their parents. For me, learning itself was fun. The process of learning was fun. No other kid I knew felt this way. If kids aren't engaged, you gotta find a way to appeal to them, and make it fun.
I love that both the replies are about autism and adhd, since I was about to go on a rant about the same thing lol. I’ve always thought my learning style was “doing” or I guess kinetic, but that’s really because when I’m doing something I’m actively engaged and I *want* to be. Chemistry for me this past year was fun and interesting because it was new and exciting, algebra 2 was the worst math class I’ve ever taken because it wasn’t… but trig at the end of the year was fun. The best way to get students to retain information is to get them engaged and having fun, instead of stressing the crap out of them and using traditional methods that are way outdated.
@@jenius9164 I would like to "softly" dispute this. I'm ADHD and college was hell for me. However, I love to learn. I think learning new things is one of the most satisfying aspects of being alive. The problem for me was learning in SCHOOL. Being forced to learn was no longer learning to me. It was a chore. And I hate chores. Often times, I would be interested in a subject, but would not get a good final grade. I think learning in school is a completely different thing from learning in general.
MAKE THIS MAN PRESIDENT
I tried learning to code for ages. It wasn't until I had a reason to actually code something I was interested in that it clicked. I believe that's the key. Find a reason, find a passion, learn and put into practice.
From experience, I agree. I started a math major in college and had amazing results. I always took things I learned and tried to tackle impossible problems in mathematics with those. It still helps me today now that I've switched to a bachelor's in computer science and am now learning to code.
You also be nimble, be creative, and spark connections in your brain. Manipulate the new information to suit any new curiosities and do it often.
There's no substitute for passion!
I personally also program, and I don't honestly have a reason, I just do it as a hobby, well a hobby that I spend every second on but still a hobby.
Absolutely true, this.
My science teacher always said that there is no learning style. As long as you make the topic engaging and interesting the students learn. And the only way to do that is by involving all the 4 senses you require. Eyes for visual, ears for audio, mouth for communication and hands for hands on.
Smell: what about me?
I'm a taste learner. I have to taste the topics related objects to understand yhem
I guess taste testers are a myth then 😂
Bonus points comedy
Taste is bad in science take a bite of mercury or sulpheric acid, or asbestos and see how long you will live, or swallow a pice of plutonium.
being sponsored by google search is crazy
That one guy,
"How do you know?"
"I don't, I just assume."
Most honest human answer to anything we experience ever
"Any empirical data on that?" "No I made it up to make me feel better" would end so many arguments, and its not even shameful its just understandable
Socrates would be pleased.
How did you succeed
in making a comment with 7 rows
to be presented here
without YT breaking it by adding "read more"?
@@damyr Personally I had to click "read more". Are you positive you didn't click it so automatically that you didn't realize you had? I've done stuff like that before.
Well most of the science that we were taught was developed after assuming a lot of stuff
"When we already believe the world to be a certain way, then we interpret new experiences to fit those beliefs."
This is known as "Confirmation Bias"
And it applies to so many fields
That's why indoctrination is always a bad idea.
A test that tests sequence memorisation says very little about the success of a learning style.
A statement that best describe the majority of research done in education
I’m so glad you’ve made this video, as a professor I’ve noticed many of my students have really bought into these ideas about learning and unfortunately will often attached fixed mindsets to their ability to learn depending on whether the pedagogy matches their preferred learning style.
Of course we bought into this. A concerning number of my K12 teachers bought into this too. Almost total reinforcement from the outset for this line of thinking.
This video is so interesting because there are a number of articles that deal with learning and pedagogical practice in terms of learning style. Especially concerning indigenous cultures.
I strongly regret my past 2 yrs in university having the exact mindset u mentioned... After realizing book is one of the the best methods, learning became less tougher. (Never easy though...)
There's the pitfall we have to be wary of in accepting "everyone learns the same way" though. That being, people will throw those with learning disabilities or just take a little longer to understand a topic under the bus (as we tend to do already). Despite the fact there's plenty of dyslexic people, for example, who have contributed to science (since we value that so much). Also, doing well in school isn't indicative of future success. My mother who's a nurse said a lot of straight A students weren't cut for real work, just to give a personal example. There's plenty out there though. There's more to this than just "everyone learns the same". What about teaching styles? Genetics? Cultural values? Use of language? Environment? Mental states/stresses? Or maybe something we haven't thought of yet. This stuff is not as cut and dry as so many people think it is. That within itself is why it's so heavily debated and controversial.
@@korinoriz
This.
The difference the New Zealand teacher saw between teachers may not be down to "learning styles", but to 'seeing' the individual pupil.
If a teacher listen to the pupil and accommodate the pupil feel safe and valued and this further learning.
When the pupil is on board with learning the teacher can nudge the pupil in a direction of instruction that makes the teacher's life easier. Trying to do it the other way around disconnect a substantial percentage of pupils from learning.
Sadly the focus today is on "efficiency" and standardization and the-devil-take-the-rest.
I would posit that we are currently sacrificing ~10% of pupils because they have a hard time moving in lockstep, not because they are unable to learn.
Learning a concept is not the same as memorization. It is funny the solution is to present information in as many styles as possible disproves a learning style preference. When you ask people "picture an apple in your head. From 1 - 10 with 10 being as clear as real life how well can you see that imagined apple?" You will get wildly different answers. Mind's eye seems to depend on the person, just People's tendencies to self vocalize or have music stuck in their head. Multimodal is definitely better because it increases the probabilistic nature of learning.
I never thought of learning styles during my education. What I did notice: I always did better when teachers where passionate about the subject and in turn made the classes more interesting. It didn't even matter how easy or strict, how likeable or dislikeable the teacher was. It just worked for me and had a drastic effect on my grades.
Same with me! Their passion was contagious and I would find myself having the same type of motivation as them to learn/do the work
Agree with you. If the presentation is interesting, then I was ready to accept any style. I think the successful learning is more about skillful communication between the teacher and the students rather than learning styles.
I thought your last name was Veritasium XD
This right here should be thought about so much more. The two classes I’ve taken thus far in college that I really enjoyed and felt like I learned a lot from were the two taught by teachers who were well incorporated into the subject and loved their work.
100% agreed seeing another person be so unabashedly passionate about a subject is magnetic to me and instantly makes me many more time interested and focused on what they have to say.
I dare say that, the so-called 'learning styles' reveal less about how people learn, and more about what medium tends to spark their curiosity. Some like to read, others prefer narrated video. Both mediums can provide equal amounts of learning but, depending on the individual, one will be more engaging than the other. Perhaps 'Learning Styles' should instead be called 'Preferred Medium of Engagement".
Great comment
I’ve heard learning styles now referred to as learning preferences. The difference being that preferences change in different contexts and over time vs. something you’re born with that doesn’t change.
@@scottclare7502 exactly it's not one way someone who's watching a video to learn will change to reading it depends of the context as you said
This video completely confuses the medium and the learning style. See my comment below.
Yeah this is what I thought during the video. I reflected on my own experience and realised I don't particularly learn better using any one method, but I know doing things and watching videos engages me more than just simply reading or listening.
Best teachers are those who engage and excite students about the material and use multi-media presentation without boring people or overloading or underloading them.
A rare species those teachers are
I interviewed a lot of very good teachers - almost all were good storytellers and used humour in their teaching. It didn’t matter how they lectured (or didn’t lecture). It seems in a non scientific perspective that what mattered is their in classroom charisma.
Robin and B X both say it well. I call it cranking the fun machine. Charisma and humor both depend on correct loading, which avoids both boredom and overwhelm, only possible when the teacher is tuned in to the feedback, which comes in all forms. And you have to engage to get any feedback at all. Hilarity is a dependable feature of a good dynamic. Hook them. Lead them to surprise and delight. Rinse. Repeat.
so u want a clown not a teacher
... And this is where almost all my teachers sucked at
I has this exact experience in my classes. A student told me 'I'm a visual learner, so I don't understand anything when you explain things verbally". He pigeonholed himself and disengaged completely because of the "style" they told him.
"How do you know you are visual learner."
"I don't. I assumed."
What a legend.
Absolute legend
Genius man that accepts his own limitations
More honest than most
He spoiled the whole video from begining.
he must have seen something!
"Most people would learn geography better with a map"
That checks out
You can also take the people and the map to the geography.
Nah just tell them it is 5 thousand miles north of the south pole and 12 thousand south of the north pole and 60 thousand west of the Philippines they will know exactly where its at that way.
Sorry, but I Do learn way faster by observing visual information in combination with text. An image helps a lot to remember stuff... Am I a visual learner: well I learn faster and with more ease.
@@facefact3737 hey should watch the video fully
@@engelsseele2 That may actually just be a matter of what you're used to. After all, I can completely relate those numbers to eachother in any other context and they give in fact a way better picture of the relation of one place to another than does a map, simply because just visually gauging seems to be very inaccurate, let alone the fact that maps distort A LOT due to projections, so learning the size of Russia by looking at a map is quite literally the WORST thing you can do, because its apparent size on a map is like twice its actual size.
This is why self learning is much more powerful. If you are motivated to figure something out, you will learn more by investigating on your own terms than sitting in a room bored with your mind wandering trying to abosrb a topic you didn’t know you were interested in
Yes. Especially today with RUclips, Khan Academy, and many other online ways to learn which was barely possible 10 years ago and not really possible 20 years ago.
But also motivation eventually burns out, at least for some parts of what you want to learn and you will need to create artificial deadlines to accomplish anything - aka SMART goals. Khan academy structures learning in such a way that you can stick to the plan for a long time, without the need for additional motivation or structure. But google search, youtube and other raw sources - you have to create your own structure and deadlines.
Like right now I'm supposed to work on my 3D modelling project with no deadline and I'm instead stretching my breakfast time with RUclips lol
@@artemaung5274 The motivation burnout is relatable. But when you run out of motivation, don't panic. It's like struggling to get out of quick sand. You have a lifetime left before you give up on everything.
Yes. Especially with books.
Abosrb ugh*
This is the main principle behind unschooling.
No interrupting ads, no asking about subscribe a lot. Just 15 minutes of easily explained science
Veritas: How do you know that?
"I don't, I just assume."
Smartest dude of the bunch.
i was waitijng for this comment
About the post the same comment :D
He knows enough to realize how much he doesn't know.
"Dude, trust me." Absolutely based and gigachad.
Was Just about to comment that myself
"People learn best when they are actively thinking about the material."
This is it.
Exactly, the practical use of cognition into anki spaced repetition is more credible than VARK.
or when the teacher is not old and smelly.
That is a critical flaw in the video. Learning and understanding are different. Understanding a diagram is different from being able to do it a year later.
People have different "understanding" styles, and learning is fixing it in your memory to make it yours through time.
Musical instruments and learning; thinking about music you are learning increases your ability to play it on an instrument. 2weeks without an instrument BUT thinking about playing on that instrument will speed the ability to play any tune on an instrument. I.e get it in your head
Yeah, like he said "Learning Styles" is probably more a personal preference. Like i am personally fascinated by animations of mechanical interactions, but they alone probably wont help me learn how a combustion engine works without a written or spoken explanation of whats happening.
Likewise i also prefer to look up text-based tutorials on things i immediately want to learn in, say, photoshop, than watching a youtube tutorial. Despite myself believing that im more of a "visual learner".
I took this VARK test in high school, and as a student who didn’t perform well, I was SOO excited to find out my learning style. I scored the exact same in all categories... seems like that wasn't the reason for my struggle. I realized that once I started taking online classes in college, I learned WAY better when I wasn't around my peers. I would make funny faces, talk out loud, gasp!, yell "what!?!," stick my tounge out, lay on the floor, walk around the room, etc. Not that I needed to have a classroom that allowed me to learn this way... but I needed to have no one else watch me learning this way. I love having a real instuctor, but not other students watching me.
Now, I just simulate this by sitting at the front of the class, right in front of the teacher. No one sits in the front. Its always open. ❤
I always preferred sitting in the front row. Less distractions
Even Team Front
This comment is dope
lol why were you yelling on the floor with your tongue out in school are you on the spectrum
Also depends whether you right or left brain dominant, tactile or like moving, lot of factors needs to be considered and classroom teaching with more than 15 pupils makes it incredibly difficult.
I think for me I loved when we were doing different types of learning styles, the way of learning is important but I feel like eventually it comes down to implicating students and encourage flexibility. Give them time and enough supports but not too much as not to overwhelm them. I lack structure and I have ADHD so it’s important that things are clear. For example I always noticed that images, mind maps didn’t help me on their own because I don’t understand what exactly we have to learn from them. I think where we get it wrong is that we are not really good at one specific learning style but we can have difficulties with some because of specific disabilities that are often not addressed like bad hearing, bad eyesight, dalton’s vision, dyslexia, etc. I see a flaw in the test you ran, it only uses short term memory and doesn’t apply to things that don’t need to be copied and paste but understood and manipulated
I learned, as an educator, that information needs to be presented multi-modally in order for a lesson to be effective for any one person. Not because there are actually learning styles, but because we need to process information in more than one way to retain it.
Exactly
Agreed! I bought into "learning styles" for years until I was taught about multi-modal teaching in my Elementary education program in college.
Absolutely, agreed. I always find it that explaining a new learned topic to another person helps me so much with retaining the knowledge.
I always figured people learn more if you say it- and write it on the white board- and draw a diagram or mime it out- because the more you repeat it the more its retained- I always thought the learning style thing sounded bogus.
exactly right. And if you want to pull it up on a higher note: if this video and this utterance is correct, it means that we can finally put bruners theory of the multiple intelligences to rest. Not to take anything away from anybody, but to kill this PC movement, that is taking over everything these days
My learning style is: "oh sh*t tomorrow's the deadline"
Procastinator
@@Jetoro the best learning experience is where your heart is beating like a rabbit
My preferred learning style is the adrenaline rush 10 minutes before the test
@@Jetoro should have added "the"
I can relate with this :)
"I think one of the most common traps people fall into is only searching for infomation that confirms what they already beleive" wise words
Is that confirmation bias?
@@JD-ib4cr Yes and he has an interesting video about that topic also.
confirmation bias is definitely way too common and holds our society back.
Idk why but isn't what you quoted the same thing it's arguing about?
As I was reading this he said the exact same sentence bc I forgot to pause the video
So conclusion: HOW you learn depends on WHAT you are learning.
It's the subject-at-hand that induces the style of learning, and not the person.
You can't learn how to skate by just listening. Revolutionary.
Yes. But I'd add that there is a takeaway that a multi-modal approach is usually stronger than a singular approach.
Actual skateboarding is an absolute must. However the skateboarder who watches a few internet tutorials or listens to skateboarding podcasts might improve slightly faster than one who just practices their skateboard.
@@AdamZollo - Multimodal is superior only because it increases the number of ways that information can be stored in the brain. If you treat learning as probabilistic, where any given learning method has a 50% chance of success no matter who you're dealing with, flipping a coin once on a single learning style means only half the students will actually learn the material. Flip it twice, and 75% of the students get the material on the first day. Flip it four times, and 93.75% of students will learn the material completely on the first day. Presenting any given topic with multiple different approaches will maximize learning for purely probabilistic reasons.
@@cerebraldreams4738 From my master studies, it is more than just there being more opportunities to learn or "flipping a coin". It comes down to building a more robust neural schema with more "nodes" if you will.
Take two groups and teach 100 kids to spell a word they've never heard before. Let's go with Kaiju. Take 10 minutes to show them all how to spell it and tell them briefly what it means.
With the second group, also show them a picture of a few Kaiju within that same 10 minutes period.
Wait a day, then test both groups on their spelling of Kaiju.
My understanding is that group two will be expected to perform better at the task (spelling "Kaiju") even though they actually wasted some time looking at pictures (which isn't even about spelling).
This is not because they "flipped more coins" but rather because they've built a bigger neural schema. In fact, those students may close their eyes and visualize a picture they saw to draw out the memory of the spelling.
This is similar to the whole idea of creating a memory home.
I know I'm a little late to the party, but this comment right here, absolutely just lost it, that is hilarious.
When I was a kid i found an owner's manual for a Cessna 172 aircraft. I studied it and studied it, made my own drawings, reread parts, made lists of positions of controls, etc. After a year I was certain I could fly a plane. As luck would have it, a few years later I had the chance and...I couldn't.
The most frustrating part of all of this for me, as a teacher, is knowing that learning styles were already debunked years before I did my teacher training, getting indoctrinated into this system, and now, fifteen years later, still having learning styles show up regularly in my professional development courses, staff meetings, and job interviews. The entire field of education is notorious for quickly jumping on the bandwagon for every new idea about how to teach better but taking generations to be willing to admit when those ideas have turned out not to be correct.
The American School System Is Trash And It Will Continue To Be So Until Someone Does Something Drastic That Will Either Overthrow The Current System Or Force It To Become Better.
If you only teach a single way, you're the problem. At least the learning styles encourage teachers to use multiple methods of explaining the same things.
@@tgamer1510 It is a rather large leap to go from an ideological disagreement with a debunked dogma to the assumption that one who disagrees with the theory of learning styles must therefore only teach in one way. I typically teach any given concept in two ways, and try to vary which ways I use from concept to concept. But the principle behind a learning-styles approach is the idea that each student should be taught each concept according to their own learning style, not multiple learning styles. In some applications of this principle (including most of the studies purporting to support this theory), students are separated into cohorts with shared learning styles, and then exclusively taught according to that learning style. In that format, learning styles do not, as you put it, encourage teachers to use multiple methods of explaining the same things, they encourage a lack of variety in teaching methods -- they encourage teachers to always use the same one method, which not only does not turn out to improve student learning despite supposedly respecting each student's learning style, it also eliminates the well-known benefits of teaching a single concept in multiple ways (a principle with which I think we both agree). Conversely, if the students are not grouped according to learning styles cohorts (as I think is probably the more common case), then the doctrine implies that each concept should be taught not only according to more than one style, but that each concept should be taught numerous times, according to each of however many learning styles one happens to accept as meaningful (one of the principal problems that must be determined before any attempt to apply the doctrine). And while I agree that each new re-explanation according to another learning style would improve learning, each new mode also comes with diminishing returns, and we need to take account of the amount of classroom time that is available to teach any given concept when we really need to be moving on to the next concept. There are an enormous number of ideas floating around about how to improve student learning, each of which takes time. Or, as a compromise, we can try to engage all of the learning modalities in a single explanation; from an ideological perspective, this is liable to be a poor compromise, since it may not allow any of the students to fully engage with the topic according to their own learning styles -- not that this matters, of course, since the learning styles are a myth anyway -- but from a practical perspective, this also requires considerably more time, some of which occurs in class and would therefore slow down class progress, but a great of additional time is also required to plan lessons of this kind. And whatever expectations we might have about the amount of time teachers should spend planning their lessons, we are forced to acknowledge that there are ultimate limits dictated by the number of hours in a day. I would rather use what limited time I have available for each concept using methodologies that bring greater returns. In no other field that I know of is it a virtue to continue blindly adhering to debunked hypotheses.
@@MusiMasterJam I didn't bother reading your entire reply because I noted that you said I made an assumption when in fact I didn't. I merely said "If you only teach a single way, you're the problem" I never said you did this, nor does my statement imply that's what I was trying to say. I mean it's not really debunked, until you do any testing on a larger or at least better scale. A few hundred similarly educated people in the trial here cannot accurately represent entire populations.
@@tgamer1510 Point taken. Though I would note that the literature debunking learning styles is extensive. Willingham, D., E. Hughes, and D. Dobolyi (2015), "The Scientific Status of Learning Styles Theories", Teaching of Psychology, Vol. 42(3), 266-71 cites nearly a dozen reviews of the literature spanning from as early as the late 1970s to as recently as the mid 2010s demonstrating the failure to support the theory (see especially p. 267). The conclusion that learning styles are now debunked rests by no means on a small body of evidence.
I’m an ignominious learner. I only seem to learn if crushing emotional humiliation and pain is involved.
I feel this in my bones.
Ooof same
@@DyslexicMitochondria hey bro I watch your videos. Love your channel
There's a subculture for that.
There is a saying I am fond of. If it didn't hurt - you didn't learn anything. While not true in all scenarios I definitely see a LOT of people who aren't learning simply because their actions did not yield a suitable pain response.
3:01 so real
Fr
We're told the public isn't interested in education, but then a video on learning styles proves extremely popular. Conclusion: people crave education that delivers!
Woah!
When I saw the views, I just assumed this was like a week old, but I looked at the time after seeing your comment. It's only been up for 5hrs, and it's 3/4 of the way to a million views already.💫
It's a relevant topic. In school, I was frustrated with how the material we had access to in middle school was divided up based on "learning style," which meant nobody had access to all of the explanatory information. It seemed counterproductive when we could've instead learned to share, providing everyone with all the necessary material.
This is still an average performing video...
Also audience of a science RUclipsr ≠ "the public"
i like your optimism but people who watch science videos on youtube are not a cross-section of the public
That's anecdotal and unscientific
I remember in school, being asked straight up to pick one of the VARK learning styles that we thought were best for us. I recall being very conflicted and uncertain choosing, because I knew that my skillset was based heavily on music and sounds (I now have a degree in Sound Engineering) so at that time, i felt obligated to pick Auditory. But honestly, I felt like I could learn from any style, as long as the teacher was engaging and the content was interesting.
I did very poorly in high school classes, barely graduating with passing marks.
But in college, I made Dean's list every semester. I don't think it had to do with learning style, but rather the subject matter was interesting and relevant to what i enjoyed.
Awful! It’s such a tickbox exercise for schools. I remember we were asked to do the VARK test to see which one we were (we weren’t told it was VARK, just a test and we thought it would put us into “set” classes!!). We weren’t given enough time and most people hadnt finished. We were told to hand it in anyways so most people just ticked random boxes for the next few questions (in hope of getting more marks) which would have skewed the results. It’s only after we were told it was VARK and realised oh crap
Oh putting music to anything helps pretty much everyone. To this day I still recite poems and songs from like School House Rock to help me remember stuff 😂 it stays with you forever
Do you have any advice for someone whod want to get into sound engineering?
My school made us pick one and plan every aspect of our studying according to it. We were even tested on what strategies worked better for different learning styles. It was so confusing and I didn't have any idea what was going on
@Roger this is exactly how I felt when learning the partitive articles in my French class
2:58
"How do you know you're a visual learner?
-I don't, I just assume"
This man figured it out
the most honest and self aware from the group LOL
Someone find that dude and clone him. We need more people like him in society.
Literally, whenever I was asked that I just assumed, "Oh, I must be kinesthetic" but it's not that straightforward
lol this guy cracked me up!
Most people probably think that visual learning is taking a book or video home and learning there at their own pace, instead of being in a noisy classroom where there is a lot of pressure to perform. For instance, if a person feels uncomfortable at the lecture, and understands everything much better by reading the study book later, he might think it is because he is a visual learner. So they don't even know the definition and mix up forced socializing (being around other people while learning something), pressure from other students or teacher and the learning style.
It might be so because usually different learning styles have different levels of socializing, for instance if you call yourself a hands on learner, you might like having one on one time with teacher, them showing you what to do and then can finish it on your own. At the same time, verbal learning often includes being in front of many people when answering the teacher, the pace is dictated by the teacher and everybody is watching you.
In fact, this video made me feel uncomfortable, because I can't relax when the other person is there, I'm thinking more about doing something wrong and I can't turn those pages on my own to develop a strategy or look at something for longer. Also, I find it hard to switch between socializing and learning. I don't think either of those methods were what people think of when they talk about visual learning - seeing something on their own, not being distracted and not being disturbed by the other person talking when they switch their mind into seeing in pictures instead of words.
as an education major, i dealt with classmates who when confronted with the fact that there is no evidence to show individuals have significant differences in their own learning style, actively rejected the idea because it’s so rooted in our philosophies. luckily, after we learned the real science of it everyone was excited to use it correctly. multimodality extends beyond visual and written/oral language. the most fun lesson i’ve ever done with students had them acting out the life cycle of their research animal in the middle of a big circle of students. it was so impressive to see they remembered things like seahorses linking their tails and my favorite, a mother manatee pushing her newborn baby out of the water for its first breath. i could have cried. learning can be so fun sometimes.
My grade 8 science project, back in the late 80's, was on learning styles. My teacher was shocked and surprised when I submitted my project idea. All my subjects were my classmates. Over a span of a couple weeks I tested their comprehension of certain short stories, pictures, and videos; through visual, audio, and reading. When the science fair day came, my booth wasn't the most popular with any of the other kids, but with all the school teachers and parents... they loved it. I remember the results of my project was inconclusive because I tested each student individually with each individual method of learning. No one method of learning is better than another, but combining multiple methods of learning is where results would be seen. But I ran out of time to combine methods of learning before the project was due.
I love you
wow! if you don't mind, what field did you end up working in?
ahahahha Ya , sure it was hahhahh
in the 80's as an 11 year old you knew more about learning than professionals did. the new psycology suggest that humans learn best when mulltiple learning methods are used. nice.
Wow... Neat
This would explain why many people, including me, believe RUclips videos explain things better than school did. Videos have the advantage of being every style at once and edited down to be only a few minutes. Few teachers, if any, can replicate that kind of effectiveness in an in-person lecture.
Another factor is how you are seeking out the information on your time, at your pace. You're not slapped down into a classroom and told "get used to this place cause you're gonna be here almost every day of your life for the next 12 years or more" when you watch these videos. You see them in your recommended or subscription and go "nice, I'll watch that."
On top of this, you can watch at any rate you want. If you miss something, you can easily go back like 15 seconds and listen again without having social pressure of raising your hand and requesting another explanation, or pause the video altogether and come back whenever you want if you're losing focus. If the person in the video is too slow, you can speed the video playback as fast as your internet allows (I have an extension that lets me go beyond the 2x speed, audio still playing even at 8x), while a teacher that talks too slow is just something you have to deal with, in person.
Ultimately, online content has a massive advantage over traditional classes. The problems tend to form when it comes to how you'd be able to make sure all kids are getting the same general education without a classroom, where attendance is mandatory and standardized tests are in place, even if they're horribly executed.
Well said
@@Naokarma I could not agree more.
Did we watch the same video? Or am I just being stupid here lol
and the amount of work for a youtube video: I teach 28 lessions per week at a public school. I cant pour 50 hours of work into a 15 minute sequence. Of course the youtube videos can easily have a much higher quality.
My learning style is: “I’ll do it tomorrow.”
My soulmate. 🤣
Oh so you are like me: a procrastinator
OH MY GOD 🤣🤣🤣😆
Paused the video to read the comments. I’ll come back soon
Which is a good strategy if you are stressed and tired today.
If you always are tired and stressed you should adress this before embarking on learning.
It is totally worth it: learning is the most mind altering drug out there ;-)
And how will you "cheat" the laws of nature by near-magic like mobile phones, penicillin and robots if you don't know the rules?
I finally understand why I could never figure out my learning style.
I was so confused because I preferred different things for different concepts, and preferred combining them together 😂
The guy who recognized that he was making an assumption is my hero.
Self awareness is so underrated
Or you are making an assumption of him being a hero.
red pilled
yeah same I thought that was very self-aware of him
He eats mushrooms
I think people choose visual because the information is often presented at a whole whereas auditory information is presented in series. The latter punishes momentary lack of attention harder.
Yeah exactly
Yes Visual is kind of dumb, because, text is visual, pictures are visual. your own hand eye coordination is visual. I'm just saying. And as you said there is always some sort of auditory element, when a teacher explains a concept.
I follow the this style when learning a new skill, ; (Look/Listen, Read, Do, Review (repeat as needed). Listen to the lecture/watch it and make notes for any specific information that you need to pay special attention to, then read the material in full , then practice the material and review the material as needed.
This guy Phds
Being an easily distracted learner (even as a 24-year-old student pursuing a second bachelor's degree) I would agree!
Not entirely true. The visual presents the information as a whole, but you have a search for details and get interested in the thing to get some understanding. While the text will dissect the information for you and go step by step as to what it represent. You might not be able to understand a somewhat complicated graphic just by looking at it, but once you have the narrative around it, all it's meaning take form. This is basically what Veritasium says in it's video.
Teacher in training: I took a class that argued that learning styles dont exist--people are better equipped to learn when they are given materials that keep their attention and engagement, and when new information is built upon and connected to prior information.
Since you are a teacher in training: is that the common view these days? (that learning styles is a myth). The concept seems to be so common that I presume the change in perspective is somehow new. Could you comment on that? Cheers.
@@Petrvsco Yes: it's been the common view for at least 20 years. It simply takes popular science and the public that long to catch up and realise.
Same (15 years ago), but then two years ago I was working on my masters and the professor assigned work on matching learning styles (I wrote a paper debunking it with plenty of sources and discussing the use of multiple modes and matching mode to content. I failed the assignment.)
I recently finished my education degree )~3 years ago) and would say that this is a fairly common view. However I also believe that the different “learning styles” help me categorize my teaching and help me think about teaching in different ways.
i was expecting a punchline lmao
There is one element to this that was not addressed: as a teacher, it does not really matter if the RCT said VARK doesn't work, once your student already believes that it does. The placebo effect is strong and it affects other important aspects of learning like comfort and motivation. So it often pays off to go along with peoples preferences to an extent. It is good to know that it doesn't hold any water though, so you can focus on more important things about the classroom rather than trying to inventory everyone's own thing.
I kinda get what you're saying, but I don't think lying or pretending that something exists and matters is a healthy way to maintain interest from your students. Especially when it could be harmful to make your students think they're bad at learning in a certain way when they are not.
The biggest thing is that people learn what they like, what they’re interested in, or at the very least what they’re motivated to learn. We’re also very social learners as a species, which is why babies can’t learn from videos and books, they NEED human interaction (which can also include videos/books). It’s also true that children learn best from and with other children, which is why PLAY is so critically important for kids, especially young kids
I can learn minecraft lore in 30 minutes, but can't find X.
Absolutely. Ppl learn better and more efficiently, if interested in the subject.
For some neurotypes (like ADHD and autistic) it can be almost impossible learning things that the individual finds uninteresting or that there is no 'good' reason to learn.
But the social learning part, doesn't seem to be true for everyone, autistics especially, can be quite distracted by the presence of other ppl and oftentimes learn more efficiently when they do solo research, at their own pace.
We have plenty of examples of little autistic children teaching themselves to read, because they wanted to read something specific or learning a foreign language, solely from watching tv.
I find this highly interesting. :-)
wrong
@@jerrycorwa6601 You're the one who is wrong.
spot on. Motivation is a massive factor.
One of the best things I heard when I was learning about teaching was this: 'If your students become bored at any point, you'll lose them. Keep them alert. Keep them engaged. The rest will follow."
Exactly. If you can get students to be focused for 1 hour each day, 80% of the time that student will be successful, with or without homework completion. They’ll memorize all of the content without studying at all. It’s hard to do that though when a teacher has 30+ students in a class. Like I’ve always been interested in math, physics, and biology, so I’d have laser focus for that hour each day, and I’d almost get perfect scores even though I rarely studied or did homework. But in classes like history and English I can barely hold my focus and I’d struggle to keep good grades.
@@bigsmall2842 A singer, sports figure, talkshow host, or news commentator can do it for millions at a time. If the teacher can't figure it out for 30, then perhaps the problem is a little more obvious.
that's actually a great thing to tech future teachers
but each student has their own pace
I can't deal with repetition
so I did best in my final year of high school or professional school
full throttle and exams back to back, just lean back and enjoy the ride
Gee, ya think? Thank you, Captain Obvious.
Idk. It's a decent sentiment but I'm seeing it play out depressingly in practice. Now I'm seeing it spun as "oh some of your students aren't participating in the lesson? It's because you didn't make it engaging enough. Yeah I don't care that you spent 3 extra hours planning an escape room, lack of participation = boring lesson on your part." Orrrrr maybe it's that I teach high school math and the majority of my students come to me not knowing that 3x means 3 times x. Or how to plot a point. Or how to square a number. Meanwhile I'm supposed to be teaching them to square binomials a month into the year. And instead of being allowed time to get them caught up, I have to grind out new material they've never been prepared for, some of which is mathematically useless and I would never teach if given a choice (looking at you high school geometry proofs), every day to be able to give them district tests on time.
The schools with low engagement, which are high poverty schools where teachers already have a high stress workload, are the ones hit with this sentiment the hardest. It also creates this false expectation that learning should be inherently fun. It isn't, and that's ok and our students need to know that's ok. As a millennial, I had a rude awakening getting to adulthood and realizing the baby boomer fantasies of the American workforce I was brought up with were a lie. I worry we're doing the same thing with Gen Z. Giving them the expectation that if it's not engaging to them, it's not worth their time.
What I have found is that relationships really are everything. The best way to get a kid to solve an equation isn't to create an interpretive dance re-enactment or some nonsense. It's also, very sadly to me, is not showing them how it's applicable in real life. (straight from "math is uselessssssss" to "ok but I'm never going to care enough to actually do that cause that's doing too much" 😞) It's getting them to trust and respect you enough that they understand it's important. I'd love to attain more than just respectful complaince from the majority of my students, but the problem isn't a lack of engaging lessons, it's the system that values a checklist of standards learned rather than actual growth. And like a whole laundry list of problems in education (like compensation for teaching being abysmal enough that we can't staff middle school math positions, and so have to hire people with no math background who literally don't know how to do high school math, just for one.) It's like my parents pointing the finger at American workers for our current unemployment rates when the actual problem is the system that allows people to work full time and still not earn enough to pay rent and know you'll be eating every day.
Sorry this became a rant 😅 TL;DR telling teachers to make lessons more engaging wrongfully shifts the blame for problems in our education system to teachers and hurts students in the process.
Being taught electronics without diagrams sounds horrendous. That’s like hearing math. Just doesn’t work.
Or math in text. It's super hard to understand in text.
The more I think about these learning styles the more I realise that it is a combination of all three that helps me and it depends largely on the subject. Reading an entire book about a dry subject would be boring to me without visuals - so I would probably prefer watching a documentary or looking at pictures. But I would rather read a manual than watch a 30 minute RUclips video on how to do something because I can skip the things I already know in a manual or speed read - especially if its a hands on task like cooking and I already know the basics and how certain ingredients behave under certain conditions so I don't need anyone to show me from scratch. Equally, some subjects require me to throw in auditory aids - I am not that good at Maths and just seeing a formula doesn't help me if I can't discuss it with another person and have them talk me through the logic. And sometimes I actually need to do something myself rather than learn the theory of a subject as only the theory will likely go over my head unless I can touch it and feel it and walk myself through the process. Unfortunately the education system often has one or more elements missing (eg University and school is largely textbook based and you are not really exposed to a real working environment, online courses you don't have anyone to talk the subject through with, learning by doing is ok if you work in a lower skilled job but if a company only employs people and trains them on the job sometimes theoretical training is missing which could fill in the gaps). (P.S.: I have ADHD and you have to keep me entertained if you want me to learn anything...lol). So I believe some learning styles are better if you already have basic knowledge and some are better if you start completely from scratch but overall it's a combination of all three.
The thing he is getting at is this: the 'best' learning approach is dictated by the MATERIAL, not by some presumed personal style. You are certainly correct, for electronic circuits, that subject begs for diagrams - but for example, in teaching about rhetoric or speech-craft, you would not want to just read the words from a speech from MLK, the best learning approach would be to listen to his voice. (thinking further on this MLK idea, you might think a visual movie of him giving a speech might add still more.... but probably not, that could actually take away from your learning goal which might be to understand the power of spoken language - so the best learning approach might be to close your eyes and just listen). Let the nature of the materials dictate the best style. And for sure, several styles/methods together will probably be even better. But for example do NOT put lots of text on a PPT slide when you are going to say the same words. That overloads the working memory, with its two channels of input, auditory and visual - instead utilize one channel, auditory, with all your narration words, and utilize the visual channel with either just a few keywords (almost more as illustrations than as text) or better have a visual representation (Illustration, animation, picture) of what the narration is all about. That way you respect the working memory and get maximal complimentary learning approach benefits.
This is addressed in the video. For various domains, it makes sense to incorporate media appropriate for the domain. If learning geography, it helps to visualize with maps. This is not inconsistent at all with the overall premise in general.
That's how I do equations
What this leaves out is the value of Interest and engagement in learning. Gauging performance on a single test won’t show whether or not being forced to learn in a way that doesn’t match your preference long-term affects your desire for lifelong learning etc.
My dad always told me since I started school like 15-16 years ago, to read out my text book loud, then my eyes would see it, my mouth would say it, my ears would hear it, and my brain would process it; then try to either repeat or write down what I remember so my hands will express the information too. 5 different methods of learning at once, for the maximum information intake, and since all senses are focused on the task, less distractions as well. My dad is really wise I should listen to him more lol.
Using a pen is also a game changer. Sooo many signals run to and from the brain from the tactile pen and your eyes focus on the writing tip. Automatic concentration!
@@tectopic That was the key to school being easy for me. If I didn't do it - if I just looked material over or just discussed it with friends - nothing came out of my pen in the exam.
Don't forget to lick the book to incorporate your sense of taste
@@ozmorfgamereviewsalso don't forget to smell the book
The problem with this is, it is a lot of hard work and time consuming.. and I am (probably most people) very very lazy😁
Love, love, love, this video. I taught high school biology for 15 years and you hit the nail on the head. It's not the student that needs to be taught with a specific style, it's the topic. Not only do teachers stress themselves out trying to present topics like photosynthesis in a kinesthetic way, but it probably doesn't make any sense for them to do so. Worse yet, some topics that are easy to grasp with any delivery mechanism get hours of class time devoted to them because they fit in well with a hands on lab, while difficult to understand topics are neglected because there is no easy to to present them in multiple modalities.
VARK is basically gospel in educational training, hopefully this video leads to a better understanding of how we approach these modalities.
🎼
As a student this is far too relatable. Like VERY relatable
@MegaMrblackguy Have no idea what you said.... maybe writing out some real words might help.
But what about the best LED strip available on the market now? JK Love your videos and its nice to see your concern about education too
A fun problem is when you are asked to include multiple modalities for a lesson plan to be good enough for evaluation. It isn't just that it is gospel; sometimes this learning theory is required.
Being sponsored by Google Search is one of the biggest flexes ive ever seen
Seems like the duck is trying to overtake Google lol
It's a good thing that Google sponsored this video, because otherwise I never would've known that Google existed.
Actually why would google sponsor a video when nobody doesn’t use google
Just remember scientists are just as easy to buy as politicians.
@@taylorleeforcongress8470 well said! 💯
As a teacher, I do my best to use all the modes. My undergraduate degree is in psychology and I understood this principle, and many others connected to this, beforehand. It’s incredibly difficult to change the education system as “intuition” is a frequently used method for strategies. Teachers genuinely want to do the best by their students but often lack the training to best direct their effort.
A teacher of mine had our class take a learning style test, and mine was split evenly between the three options. Visual, hearing, and hands-on. All I know is that I’m a slow learner.
U are ok dude. The sistem is too broken, to be effective in learning in any way. If u are learning something, that u are very interest with, and have it right before ur class eyes, and u have patient teacher, have the paitience and the willing to answear the questions of the students (and yours), u will suddenly become "fast learner" dont u think?
I'm not a slow learner. I'm not a fast-learner. I'm a half-fast learner!
@@zvetanzvetanov7228 You are a perfect example of it.
@@zvetanzvetanov7228
Personally, I may be deeply passionate about my current studies, it still takes me hours long to review and study the content of a single 2-hours-long course. Admittedly, I tend to get sidetracked a lot.
Slow learners often retain their information longer than quick learners
I've always hated those tests because it told me I was a kinesthetic learner and all my teachers tried to get me to interact with stuff and stopped teaching me like I was a normal person. My grades plummeted so they put me back in my normal teaching
Lmao what did they try??
I believe approaching a problem in more then one learning style is the right way to try and understand problems and resolve them. You get different information from the different methods and this can help you cross reference and fill in blanks that using only one style cause.
@@joeykoch5664 totally agree
wow... this is real evidence, the grades!
At the same time I find it cool that you attempted to learn that way.
I did a research study on learning and memory in college … long story short…. When more cognitive processes were involved, memory and recall improved
I think you put it in good words not that you are a visual learner but it foes improve your recall and memory. Because I know I'm not a visual learner but whenever it comes across that I watch something like a photo or video while studying a subject which requires me to memorise it becomes more effective and stays.
I just hate colours and highlighters on notes.
@Cassie you are correct. For example, a kinesthetic and/or visual approach to learning a new motor skill such as riding a bike or swimming would most likely produce better outcomes.
@@Basetsnaolebile Research has been done on different “study skills” such as note taking, highlighting, outlines, flashcards ect- long story short- “highlighting” compared to other forms produced the poorest results. Highlighting serves better as a “cueing” mechanism for individuals to return to subject matter later.
@@BenDrenkin Can I ask for the source or the research paper itself? I'm very curious and interested of its implications on learning.
@@SoulCrusher-el1fi x2
Seeing something get done, teaches me, actually doing it, solidifies the knowledge. I believe that would be considered hands-on learning, with a splash of visual.
"People learn geography better with maps." I'm one of the few who learns geography better by listening to the locations in sonar. 🐬
😅🤣🤣
Good job
Are you an active or a passive sonar learner?
😂😂😂
I learn Geography better by not being American 😁😆🤣🤣🤣
"How do you know?" "I don't. I just assumed." I like that guy. A lot of people could learn from him.
That's a dude who's really learned something from the world.
@@Diditallforthexp No, he just never questioned anything.
He has a Assumption style of learning
I think this is the best answer for this learning model.
I like his honesty XD
I think that one important part about learning, is that it's always easier when it's something you're interested in.
I fully agree there, the thing I always try do when trying to tutor someone is relate to principle to something in their life.
I paused at 10:24, and I don't recall that being mentioned at all in the video. Kind of massively important to the topic at hand!
Best comment
Dude. Yes!
What… does that have to do with anything…?
I am able to read, take notes, and listen to lectures at the same time. I have had teachers/ instructors call me out in classes for doing this until they ask me a question. I would answer to show I am listening and usually was left alone after I answered correctly. It just works for me. Don't unstand it.
"how do you know you're a visual learner"
"I don't, I just assumed."
*_He is the chosen one_*
istg hahah
My brother said i can get new potato if i can get 1k subs
I thought the same thing. I said out loud to my cat, "I like that dude."
2:59
@@wandoblx My brother said i can get new potato if i can get 1k subs
"How do you know?"
"I don't know. I just assume."
I think I would get along with this guy.
the most real guy out of everyone interviewed
Sounds like a physicist to me!
He was the closest to the truth.
i am glad they didnt cut him out! he's so honest and I love it.
Plot twist: Turns out *_everyone_* is a "What I pay attention to" learner...
Not really, concentration certainly is needed but NOONE can be concentrated at everything, thus there's a "preference" to classify/separate on what's important to what isn't, and usually one of the ways to "increase capacity" of what can be learned is writing things down
Or, at least that's how I did/do.. :)
So, distinction without a difference?
and the ones that learn the best across all subjects tend to be one's that employ learning techniques that are not actively taught by the teacher. This is why vocab is such a poor subject for many kids. not many people will just learn a list of words and definitions even when used in stories. meanwhile if you have multiple activities for each concept, when tested on the material you will see better results. Especially when activities engage more.
haha GOT'EM
I’m too poor to pay attention.
I'm in the learning and development department at a manufacturing facility. We used this test in orientation to help for when new hires go to the floor to train. I've been working on shifting us away from the learning style model for a few months now. This video is super helpful!!!
I am a former science teacher. In my experience ALL students learn better when concepts are presented in a variety of ways, and all students learn in a variety of ways. Not only do students lack a dominant learning style, but believing they do can be counter productive, at least for teenagers. It is easy for them to shut off their brains during a lecture because they are not "auditory learners." Of course a good lecture will include visual and other ways of communicating. There is a reason for blackboards.
BTW there's a strong joy feeling when you relate things that you didn't know were connected. Dopamine or something?
The most successful strategy I ever saw was a math teacher I had who gave out candy if you were the first person to spot a mistake in her work or the textbook. Engagement was high to say the least...
@Fat Jack Or you know most blackboards are green now.
For me to learn, I need to be interested in it first 😂
@@AngelusBrady it's just a strawman, and a weaponized one at that... :(
There is so much pseudoscience in education; it's maddening to be a teacher at times. This doesn't surprise me in the slightest, and god help me for the number of people who believe (because they were enthusiastically taught) that Gardner's multiple intelligences are a meaningful thing.
"While Gardner helpfully expands our notion of intelligence, the psychologist _Robert J. Sternberg_ helpfully distills it again. Rather than eight intelligences, Sternberg’s model proposes three: _analytical, creative, and practical._
Further, unlike Gardner’s theory, Sternberg’s is supported by empirical research."
Brown, P. C., L, H., & Mcdaniel, M. A. (2014). _Make it stick : the science of successful learning._ The Belknap Press Of Harvard University Press. P. 148
you should up the input hypothesis
Amen!
THE MITOCHONDRIA IS THE POWERHOUSE OF THE CELL..... MEMORIZATION DOES NOT MEAN YOU UNDERSTAND SOMETHING.
I´m a teacher as well. Got any other exmples?
My personal theory for why learning styles and even things like personality tests exist is that people love categorizing themselves in some type of group. And yes, this is such an INTJ Scorpio Ravenclaw thing to say.
That makes sense. Sense of belonging
Not only themselves but everything that is around us. It makes life easier but at the same time, less accurate. That's why we have just bunch of colors and we even may argue that this thing is different color than others say - our categories are a bit different. For the same reason there are usually just a few political parties. We just pick the one we think we should be in and ignore the fact that they don't meet our standpoint in some degree.
That makes sense, but there's also the fact that there are phony companies and "education experts" capitalizing on it. I was in adult education, and was sent to a workshop on learning styles, which is something that study after study and research after research have debunked. Yet, many people end in education (especially in adult education and training) without any foundation of the learning sciences, which clearly debunks the learning style nonsense. Furthermore, studies show that many learners show a more efficient learning using methods other than their preferred one.
You're probably right.
But I think you meant hypothesis
Lmao Im an INTJ Sagittarius Ravenclaw and I was thinking the same.
The key to learning is effort.
The "idk, I just assume" guy was actually the most accurate out of the bunch🤯. Super human
One of the things my high school taught us was that the more ways you interact with the material you're learning, the better you'll remember it. We were taught to use the Cornell notes system: take your notes, draw doodles for each idea, and then summarize the lecture. I don't know anybody who enjoyed it, but now that I'm in university, I take my notes, take screen grabs of images and diagrams that help explain a concept, and make "summary" note pages every 3-4 weeks (not after every lecture, though). My university tells us repeatedly that the more time we spend engaging with a topic (in any manner), the better our grades will be.
Best of luck for your academic career
Sounds insanely time-inefficient to me.
There was a comedy show on PBS that came from the BBC about lectures, professors and students.
The professor was in a lecture hall giving his lecture. The camera panned around to show students busily taking notes, with some of them recording the lecture on little cassette recorders. The scene shifted to the next lecture where there were several empty seats where recorders were recording the lecture. Another lecture and about half the seats were empty with recorders recording. Another lecture and the hall was completely devoid of students with nothing but recorders furiously recording the lecture. Finally, the last scene showed the empty lecture hall with all the recorders recording and when the camera swung around to the front, the professor was gone, and a large reel to reel recorder was delivering the lecture.
@@N2AIyt it's more efficient than the people that try to review a whole topic the night before their exam...
My daughter took an elective class in 7th and 8th grade. It was all about staying organized and taking notes effectively. She learned how to use the Cornell notes system. While she doesn't do that today, she did take components from it and honed her own style of learning. The experience was beneficial.
The guy who says "I dont , just assume" is was ahead of the curve here
and you is are ahead of the keyboard here
@@aka0989 😂😂😂
Bro, you is was good at grammar! 👍
@@FBT_12 is are*
@@CurvaceousCrow but if is was be who then what was is isn't?
I’ve been teaching English to ESL students for years and I’ve seen this happen. I found that being able to talk and share stories that incorporate new information, they learn and remember much more easily than being given a list of vocabulary or grammar rules to learn. It makes learning much faster and more fun if the information has context.
The most helpful thing about VARK in my experience (both learning things myself and helping others learn) is recognizing the different ways we can receive and process information so we can use all of them instead of just focusing on one. For instance, reading about a bike pump AND looking up a graph AND listening to an explanation AND using a bike pump hands-on: Doing all of these together will always be more effective than using only one of the four.
This. I think keeping VARK in mind while creating lessons is a good tool to making sure that the lesson is diverse and engaging.
To be honest, I have not ever heard of "VARK" before. But I still found out doing research yourself on a topic instead of relying on given infomations on textbooks or notes yields better results, most likely because I actually get the chance to try things, and you would remember things better if you found a actual need for it (which is why you started the research in the first place).
My threory is that most of the things we learn in school are useless to us, and we dont see a need to remember it except for tests. While there might be some demos, it is very obvious that those are engineered. On the other hand, if you do have the chance to use them in real applications, or you need to use them but forgot how to do so, or you have a hard time doing something then found out that you can do that in less then 1/10th of the effort by using a new method, you would certainly remember it.
In my opinion, it will be 100% ineffective if the student is not interested. If there is no interest, no matter what method you use, will be useless. The point of the most proper way of teaching is to make the student interested in what you teach. Personal opinion and experience.
And that’s what the research supports. The more senses/processes you engage, the more likely you are to remember something.
truth
I always figured the learning styles were idleness, procrastination, and unproductivity
what the hell you are the least one i expected here
So true
What does this even mean?
@@galaxywolf3192 I see yours is unproductivity
no, that's RUclips watching styles
“what kind of learner are you?”
“a slow one…”
Haha 😂😂 me too
Relatable
as an autistic guy i felt that
Oof, saaame. I tend to hold onto information very strongly when I do learn it, but I'm a slow learner and I can get overwhelmed really easily.
I´m the kind of guy who has to repeat at least 10x to learn something new...
2:59 "How do you know you're a visual learner?"
- "I don't, I just assume"
This man exhudes self-awareness. Lots could be learned from his well-exercised sincerity.
Kudos to the person who learns geography better in an auditory fashion than with a map.
Damn this cracked me up hard
i guess they gotta memorize the coordinates of every location
Well, for memorizing country names auditory certainly works better. For memorizing country _locations_ you'd have to look at a map.
You know geography is not just pinpointing a country or a capital on a map right ? Kudos to you if you can understand the concept of globalization or gentrification with just a map rather than an auditory explanation.
@@drmaggot1173 You do understand what a joke is right?
There are many false myths that we have been taught since we were children and they continue to be passed down generation after generation. This video is great, great content as always!
Facts. The myth I believed for the longest was the one where if you eat after 10pm you'll gain weight.
Like that stupid theory of multiple intelligences
I was told blood was blue (Edit: and turned red when exposed to the air). When I was idk 10 or 11 I was thinkin wouldn't there be some transition that I could see and then they said it was just the vein that was blue.
The measure for learning was memorization and performing well on tests. I would argue that other learning approaches provide a larger context to the material, which improves someones capacity for problem solving and innovation. But this isnt an important skill set, mostly we just need people with the technical knowledge to follow the perscribed steps, go through this checklist, get the computer to complete the design and engineering for you, or watch concrete being poured.
🍎I agree with the video's premise that all available modalities should be offered and explored in order to help enhance learning but Google is not a good search engine. It's a mass surveillance apparatus that violates people's right to privacy and security.
As a teacher there's only one style that actually matters: ask students to explain what you just exposed. That will force them to engage all their senses, memory, focus and vocabulary. Which means that they will remember a lot more after time passed by
Then I'm panicking cuz im talking with every attention and forgets how to talk and dunno the answer
So true, there is nothing more efficient
@Taichi Villaruel lol you basically just said the same thing OP said. you’re helping students engage with the material in different ways. they’re still recalling information in new ways. “explain to me what we just talked about” isn’t literal all the time. your teaching methods are the exact same just in different styles and avenues. you’re not doing anything different than what the comment said. introducing material, exploring it, and applying it
I agree with you. When someone can explained what they learned, it’s the best way to retain and understand the information. I feel that this really helps me.
No please. My classmates are really scared when a teacher asking students to explain like that. Ended with being insisted. Teacher not satisfied, students avoid that teacher. It makes gap between students and teacher
In school I had the topic "learn learning" which covered those types. Later on in my training as a careworker I had this topic again. This time my teacher told me that we all have a prefered learning style (one of the types), but we learn best if we use all types. He called it canels. If we trigger all our canels (visual, audotory, read/write and kinesthetic) we learn the best. Its the combinations that helps to manifest the input given to you in your brain.
And a little extra: We had a fifth type - communication. Learning best in groups and talking with others about it.
Thank you! I’m a teacher and I know student learning is waaay more complicated than learning styles!
Motivation, alertness/tiredness, emotional state, dynamics between students, relationships etc all play a role
So true.
as soon as you spend a few.....hours doing it!
yes but strategies used for learning and recalling are also important- not only the way the information is being layed out
@@adamland12345 of course.... there are many levels to teaching and learning
I would suggest that being exposed to all styles of learning helps students to become more skilled in each of them. Obviously, toddlers are not reading/writing learners until they learn to read and write. Listening skills can be improved with guidance, as can visual observation skills and hands-on interaction skills. Tailoring one's teaching too much in the direction of kids' already-established preferences retards their development of the other learning skills.
Now I feel like a genius when I was never convinced with these learning styles.
You and the rest of Asia
@@Aname550 I'm asian, i also don't convinced this style. Exercise and study like hell like the rest of asian and you're good to go. The most good strategy is to remember back what you learned before.
Test
Lmao
Experience is your best teacher. Theoretical learning can never be as efficient as learning by experience. Like programming, you are better off doing coding than just listening to lecture and watch some tutorials. I also find it better to play it with, like test and stuff.
I think everyone is missing the most crucial and secret ingredient: Having the intention to learn. If you just sit back, let the information get thrown at you to see what sticks, you're going to retain less than if you're actively trying to retain it. He started to show this with people that have developed some sort of learning or memory strategy. Those people have the intention to learn.
You hit the nail on the head, my friend!
Yes, any teachers know that motivation is the key ingredient in learning. People looking for "visual learning" are those who feel more motivated to engage in visual education material, which doesn't necessarily mean that they are inherently better at it. But it's likely what is needed to keep them engaged. Disappointed to see this crucial point was not addressed in the video.
Yes, but there are some people who have the intention to learn but can't come up with good methods to do it. Sure, the people who actively apply learning methods probably do want to learn, but we shouldn't dismiss those who want to learn but just don't know how to.
That's the reason why I don't like biology and physics. It's just that I am not able to process it while maths is more like what I am made for. Geography seems hard to me "literally" but visually and physically it's much better and that probably the reason why I was able to learn all the countries and their locations.
I had a student that missed class frequently, he was learning about the plumbing contract business from his family. He was learning skills that he could never get in school because he was actually applying what he was learning. I would list him as being present to keep the authorities off him and his family.
He is now a very successful plumbing contractor.
I've noticed that for me it depends on what I'm learning. For instance with science or math based subjects I seem to retain and analyze more information by visualizing and history or origin based subjects, I seem to retain and analyze information by reading. Here's the thing, most of my learning I've done alone, meaning self-taught. The advantage of being self-taught is I learn at a pace that suits me and I can readily change up the way I'm digesting information. The disadvantage is I have a tendency to not invest too much time and effort in subjects I care little or not at all. Informative video.
“Are you a visual learner?”
“Yeah”
“How do you know you’re a visual learner?”
“I don’t.”
My man
Love that kind of honesty
His brain “How do you know I know?”
He said: "I don´t, I just assumed" which is a perfectly fine answer.
I loved that reply. I would have doubled down suggesting I know that I'm a visual learner. I'm not as honest as that guy.
Your man.
I had an excellent, and very intense mathematical statistics professor for whom varying teaching style *WAS* his teaching style. I recall, one day for an hour long lecture, he came in and wrote notes and provided examples and proofs, and he never said a single word. In another day, he switched his handwriting to beautiful, perfect cursive. He was a bizarre teacher, but pushed me to the absolute limit. Great prof!
Read a teaching book entitled "The Silent Way" by Mario Rinvolucci.
Which university does this prof teach at?
And most of students hate him as teacher
i had an excellent east asian mother. today every adult in my family is an accomplished expert in their field and not a single one regrets our mother's teaching style that kept us away from a loser's fate of making
My math teacher that I once had, was able to teach me math by introducing visual, kinetic examples along with text on those things. Whilst explaining them audibly.
It was the only way for me to properly learn math, we'd usually learn math just by looking in a textbook. I wish I had him more
What I learnt is that I just can't be taught by a teacher, I have to teach myself. I have a specific way of learning and it's not normal so whenever a teacher would explain something whether it was verbally or even writing it down I just didn't get it but if I went home and googled it and did tons of research within a couple hours it would make sense. Personally I think the reason I didn't get it is because a knowledgeable person can go way too into depth about a subject they know well rather than remembering the person they are reaching doesn't have the same knowledge. It's why I struggled so hard in school to get good grades. I always thought I was dumb but really I just think a bit differently. Now I do really well, I just found what worked for me.
Literally same, 19 years of my life I have done self study and Honestly it's the best for me.
I have to learn it as a system, like why things happen or what lead up to an event to fully understand the concept
@@eurakbroshvalak4524 Same. I thought I was alone lol
@@babymae2222 both are correct.
@@monke7566 I looked it up and yes, both a correct. My apologies. I guess in the United States we use learned instead. Learnt grinds my ears!
As a teacher, it's nice to see a video on education that is acknowledging scientific consesus of the field.
As a 20 year educator, I’ve found that teaching students through a variety of “styles” keeps them engaged. Most importantly, exposing learners to a variety of modalities helps learners learn the process of learning. The key to education is finding the hook for your age of learners.
exactly why I think it is still important, thanks for sharing this.
I find the speed the information gets given to me super important. Things gotta be fast and snappy for me to keep interest
@@de-void1872 and not too fast to lose track. Time spent on a topic has to be relative to the complexity and importance of it
@@xxsuper99xx yeah teachers who repeat alot of info is were it fucks up.
@@de-void1872 Zoomers problem: they want infos be too fast, like infographics and tiktok videos