Category: Academic literacies

Growth mindset: A visual representation of a growth mindset, such as a seedling growing into a tree, to emphasize the importance of fostering a growth mindset and avoiding stereotypes associated with learning styles.

Debunking the Learning Styles Myth: A Call for Evidence-Based Educational Practices

Lee Fallin 7 Comments

This post stands as an independent article on learning styles, and I wanted to publish it as such. However, it is part of a wider experiment as this whole article – text and images are generated by an AI. Find out more here: AI-led blogging: An experiment with GTP4, DALL-E & Grammarly

Introduction to Learning Styles

Learning styles have been a popular topic in education for decades, with various models suggesting that individuals have different preferences for how they process and absorb information. Some of the most well-known models include Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic (VAK) learning styles and others like Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory and Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences.

However, the validity of learning styles as a concept has been widely debated among researchers and educators. Numerous studies have attempted to validate the existence of learning styles, but the evidence supporting their effectiveness is weak, and some even suggest that the concept is a myth. Critics argue that the idea of learning styles may oversimplify the complex process of learning and lead to ineffective teaching methods.

Instead, contemporary research points to the importance of adaptable evidence-based teaching practices that focus on learners’ diverse needs. This includes employing various teaching methods, engaging multiple senses, and addressing different skill levels rather than focusing solely on learning styles. In this way, educators can create a more inclusive and effective learning environment that benefits all students, regardless of their preferences.

The concept of learning styles has enjoyed widespread popularity in education for decades, despite a lack of empirical evidence supporting its efficacy. This post aims to challenge the legitimacy of learning styles and provide a compelling argument for why educators and researchers should be critical of their propagation. Learning styles ultimately harm learners, and the education community should embrace evidence-based practices instead.

1 – Lack of Empirical Evidence for learning styles

A cornerstone of any effective educational theory is a robust body of empirical evidence. However, numerous studies have failed to provide conclusive support for the existence of learning styles or their impact on learning outcomes (Coffield et al., 2004; Pashler et al., 2008; Willingham et al., 2015). Meta-analyses have revealed a consistent lack of empirical evidence to validate learning styles (Coffield et al., 2004; Pashler et al., 2008), indicating that the concept is built on shaky foundations.

2 – Oversimplification of Learning

The idea of learning styles oversimplifies the complex and multifaceted process of learning (Geake, 2008; Hattie, 2009). Learning is not solely determined by individual preferences but is influenced by a myriad of factors, including prior knowledge, cognitive abilities, motivation, and socio-cultural context. By reducing learning to a set of static styles, educators may inadvertently neglect these crucial aspects of the learning process, hindering their ability to cater to students’ diverse needs (Dunn & Griggs, 2000).

3 – Perpetuation of Stereotypes

The propagation of learning styles may reinforce stereotypes and an overly deterministic view of learners (Scott, 2010). By labelling students as “visual,” “auditory,” or “kinesthetic” learners, educators may inadvertently constrain students to a particular mode of learning, limiting their potential for growth and development (Dweck, 2006). This typecasting may contribute to self-fulfilling prophecies and hinder students from exploring alternative learning strategies, ultimately hindering their academic progress (Dweck, 2006).

Classroom diversity: A photo of a diverse group of students engaged in various learning activities. This image can demonstrate the need for evidence-based practices that cater to individual differences, rather than relying on learning styles.

4 – Misallocation of Resources

The continued acceptance of learning styles may misallocate educational institutions’ resources (Paschler et al., 2008). Schools and districts divert valuable resources away from evidence-based practices by investing time and money in training teachers and developing learning materials based on a concept with weak empirical support (Hattie, 2009). This misallocation has significant implications for the quality of education and students’ academic success.

5 – The Opportunity Cost of Ignoring Evidence-Based Practices

By propagating learning styles, the education community risks neglecting evidence-based practices that have been shown to improve learning outcomes (Hattie, 2009). These practices include formative assessment, feedback, metacognitive strategies, and collaborative learning (Hattie, 2009; Zimmerman, 2002). By focusing on debunked theories such as learning styles, educators may miss opportunities to implement strategies that genuinely improve student learning.

Conclusion

The persistence of learning styles in educational discourse is a concerning phenomenon that warrants critical examination. Given the lack of empirical evidence and the potential harm caused by the propagation of learning styles, we urge educators and researchers to abandon this outdated concept and embrace evidence-based practices. Doing so can create a more inclusive, effective, and empirically grounded educational environment that benefits all learners.

References

Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. Learning and Skills Research Centre.

Dunn, R., & Griggs, S. A. (2000). Practical approaches to using learning styles in higher education. Greenwood Publishing Group.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.

Geake, J. (2008). Neuromythologies in education. Educational Research, 50(2), 123-133.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119.

Scott, C. (2010). The enduring appeal of “learning styles.” Australian Journal of Education, 54(1), 5-17.

Willingham, D. T., Hughes, E. M., & Dobolyi, D. G. (2015). The scientific status of learning styles theories. Teaching of Psychology, 42(3), 266-271.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.

Why I don’t like Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle in reflective practice

Lee Fallin 3 Comments

Reflective practice

Reflective practice is a core tenet of many professions. From nursing to teaching – reflective practice is an aspect of qualification, a requirement of professional bodies and an accepted aspect of practice. Reflective practice requires an individual to engage in conscious thought about an experience, event or practice. Such thinking should be critical; considering both what has worked and what has not. The aim of such reflective thinking is to identify what went well so that you can keep doing it – and what hasn’t worked well so you can change it. In short, reflection should be a useful tool for future action. Reflection also requires some form of expression – from writing in a personal diary or keeping notes on your practice to having a conversation with peers or writing a formal essay. Reflection needs communicating – even if it is only for your own use.

Three stages of reflection for reflective practice: 1 - have an experience 2 - think about an experience 3 - put learning into practice

While there are many different academic models of reflection, they usually revolve around three core components: an experience, thinking about an experience and then putting that learning into practice. Popular models include Kolb, Gibbs, Schön, Rolfe et al., ERA and Brookfield. As a learning developer, I see these models used frequently in student work. There is, however, one model I see more than any: Gibbs‘ Reflective Cycle – and I’m sick of it.

Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle

Before I start the critique, I should first say that Gibbs’ model has its uses. The rigid structure serves some students well, setting out how their essays should look. Instead of fretting over planning, this is largely set out in Gibbs’ model.

Another advantage is that it annexes descriptions into a single section. While this can cause other problems, it at least contextualises the role of description in the rest of the piece – it is a small aspect. I also like how Gibbs’ refers to feelings as a distinct aspect. Feelings are often overlooked and their prominence in the Reflective Cycle is helpful at framing reflection as different from normal discursive academic writing.

Describe what happened briefly. Feelings - Describe feelings/emotional response. Evaluation - What was good/bad about response. Analysis - How do you make sense of it? (use research). Conclusions - General conclusions. Specific conclusions - Action Plan What would you do next time?
Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle (Image from University of Hull, 2021)

Criticisms of Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle

Having given Gibbs some form of an introduction, this section briefly lists the issues:

  1. The Reflective Cycle is boring – The six-stage model leaves little breathing room for interpretation or expansion. It produces essays that are samey.
  2. The Reflective Cycle determines paragraphs – Most implementations of Gibbs’ model force students into a single paragraph per stage of the model. This doesn’t scale well as essay lengths increase, leading to too much description and feelings. It also does not provide much freedom on how different elements of a reflection are structured.
  3. The Reflective Cycle can lead to superficial reflections – This is because Gibbs does not require the writer to challenge values or assumptions associated with any of their actions in the experience.
  4. The Reflective Cycle fails to draw connections – Without linking the experience being reflected upon to other events, there is a missed opportunity to demonstrate depth.
  5. The Reflective Cycle focuses too much on the reflector – While reflection is a highly individualistic thing, most approaches to it consider there are others. However, Gibbs fails to move beyond analysis of self. This can make reflections self-serving as opposed to individually useful (and sometimes that means challenging!).
  6. The Reflective Cycle fails to pose probing questions – While deep, probing questions certainly can be associated with some of the aspects of Gibbs’ model, as presented in overview, these are lost. This, again, leads to superficial reflections.
  7. The Reflective Cycle fails to engage critical thinking – While the model has components of evaluation and analysis, these are simply defined. Evaluation and analysis should present an opportunity for critical thinking – but this is largely absent.
  8. The Reflective Cycle fails to contextualise – The distinct sections for description and feelings are set towards the front of an essay. This can makes it difficult to links between different aspects of evaluation and analysis with elements of description.
  9. The Reflective Cycle confuses novices – So many students struggle to differentiate the evaluation and analysis. This can lead to mixed up sections. I also don’t know if the analysis and evaluation are the right way round. Sometimes I’m in favour of swopping – and others in favour of the status quo.

These points demonstrate many of the weaknesses associated with Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle. I often find simpler models more effective as they give more freedom and space for tailoring to the task required.

Other options

When considering Gibbs, it is also useful to consider that other models are available. My favourites right now are:

Rofle

Rolfe et al’s (2001) framework focuses on three questions:

  • What?
  • So what?
  • Now what?

While this may seem simpler than Gibbs, I feel it allows more flexibility and adaptation. The three questions lead writers to consider a combination of description, links to theory and actions to take forward.

Brookfield

Brookfield’s (2005) four lenses encourage reflectors to consider an event from multiple perspectives

  • Lens of their own autobiography as teachers and learners
  • Lens of students’ eyes
  • Lens of colleagues experiences
  • Lens of educational literature

This directly addresses one of the critiques of Gibbs – that there is no consideration of others in depth.

Rocketbook Panda Planner for work/life/study productivity

Lee Fallin Leave a comment

This post introduces the Rocketbook Panda Planner, a new tool I’ve been trying to help manage my work/life/study. When I first returned to work from parental leave, I needed to get my head back into the world of work. I’d tried lots of different tools to keep myself focused and help me plan and prioritise my weeks and days. For the most part, I had something that worked. However, I had to acknowledge I needed something different now I am a father to three! Something that would help me plan life — with the perspectives of fatherhood and a busy career.

I’d decided I wanted something handwritten as opposed to something digital. Mobile phones, tablets and laptops are doorways to a world of distractions. I knew that if I used an app, I would inevitably get distracted by the many other things in my devices. Probably email or Twitter — the two usual culprits.

So! I needed something to motivate, plan and prioritise. Plus it must be ‘paper-based’.

Introducing the Rocketbook Panda Planner

The Rocketbook comes with a high quality microfibre cloth and Pilot Frixion pen.
My newly unboxed Panda Planner

After some research, I came across the Rocketbook Panda Planner. Described as a planner for ‘those who want an endlessly reusable planner to last for years, if not a lifetime. The Rocketbook Panda Planner gets you organised so you can focus and hit your goals.’ That sounded just like what I needed.

The planner is split into a number of different page types to help you plan:

The Rocketbook Panda Planner has a number of sections to help you organise yourself.
Panda Planner page types

More importantly – it is reusable. I’d never considered a ‘re-usable’ notebook (and wasn’t aware they existed). It is however a fantastic idea. The entire book is essentially wipe clean. It’s a bit like a whiteboard meeting a book. This means there is no guilt from having another diary that will end up in a recycling bin. The real selling point of this wasn’t clear until I actually used it. The beautifully therapeutic moment you wipe away days and weeks of plans, achievements and reflections (there is an app to help you retain a digital copy).

Rocketbook allows you to write and organise your work before scanning it into the app and then wiping the book clean for reuse.
The Rocketbook process

Using the Rocketbook Panda Planner

I very much enjoyed the process of using the Panda Planner. I first worked through the goals and roadmap sections to plan the next quarter (3 months). I set out a number of ambitious work, research and personal goals. It also gave me a valuable opportunity to reflect on potential barriers. Here I noted that my three little ones may become barriers to progress – but it also helped me concretely write that it didn’t matter. As a parent – I needed to juggle that new balance and the Panda Planner helped me navigate this. It was helpful to pen some of this down and get to grips with my life’s new priorities. I am, perhaps, guilty of focusing on work too much – and the Panda Planner helped me bring some balance to that.

With the quarter prepared, I then moved towards weekly and daily sections. I particularly liked how they provided opportunity to undertake routines as part of the day. The daily planner (below) starts off asking what you are grateful for, and excited about — three items for each list. It also provided space for a daily affirmation. Not something I’d usually go for, but with three adopted children moving in, I was writing ‘I can do this’ a fair bit. For the evening is an opportunity to reflect on the day. Here you can record the wins for the day and take note of any opportunities to improve. The rest of the page is very much what you’d expect of a daily planner: priorities, schedule, tasks and notes.

The layout of a daily page

What I’m using

I’d recommend giving the Rocketbook Panda Planner a go. I’ve since expanded to utilise a standard Rocketbook for my general notes. You can write on them with any of the Pilot Frixion line of pens and markers. I’ve found the Frixion fineliners much better than the rollerball ones as they put less pressure on the Rocketbook pages. I think this has to work in favour of longevity.