How to unlearn the use of learning styles to support organizational learning
The Story
We arranged a training in webinar delivery techniques to support HR change roll out scheduled for the following year. The training which took place over 3 days with a practice session included was rated as successful by the participants. I listened to the summaries from groups of participants of their learning and was interested to see how much they had enjoyed the theoretical content of the training which concerned learning styles. The essential message to those designing and delivering training is that all styles need to be taken into account in any given learning experience so that as many learners as possible may benefit.
I was surprised to see firstly, the inclusion of learning styles and secondly, the enthusiasm of the participants for them. This is because research questioning the validity of learning styles is becoming more frequent (see resources for a summary of some of these). In the face of this controversy, what explains their popularity? What value is there in continuing to use the concepts for learning design? Which elements are the most useful, if any?
The Psychology
A popular model of learning styles is Honey and Mumford’s (1984). They identified four learning styles or preferences based on Kolb’s work on the experiential learning cycle. These preferences are:
Activist: people with a preference for learning this way, learn by doing and enjoy ‘social’ learning activities which enable them to involve themselves fully in the process.
Theorist: they like to understand underlying theory in the learning proposed. Models, concepts and facts support them to engage with the learning.
Pragmatist: they need to see how learning can be put into practice in the real world. They need opportunities and time to think about how learning can be applied.
Reflector: prefer to observe and reflect on what is happening perhaps from the periphery and from different perspectives.
I once designed a learning programme for career counsellors based on this theory of which I was very proud at the time. I thought of strategies for use with people who were ‘stuck’ with their career decision making based on their learning preferences and taught the use of these in a short course for a group of business school career advisors. I found that learning styles or preferences are easily understood and people identify with their own preferences immediately so it is satisfying as a trainer to work with them.
I also had the opportunity to see the successful roll out of many of the HR change initiatives referred to in the story above in areas as diverse as performance management, mobility, recruitment and learning and development. The teams involved had incorporated thinking about learning using different methods as part of their communication planning in support of the change initiatives. I am sure the training in learning styles and webinar delivery helped with this and encouraged people not in the learning and development function to see learning as part of change implementation and to be creative in the way they incorporated different activities into the training and learning they designed.
What helps
Refraining from being too much of an ‘expert’ when critiquing foundational principles upon which learning and development practice in organizations is founded. People are attached to these principles for a reason so focus instead on understanding these.
Encourage learning design teams to think about how learning support methods need to vary according to the kind of material being learned rather than the ‘styles’ of learners.
Remembering that including the learning component in best practice communication planning to accompany change initiatives is probably more important than whether it is driven by learning styles theory or not.
Resources
This article from the BPS’s (British Psychological Society) research digest suggests that learning styles may be a myth.
‘The idea that we learn better when thought via our preferred modality or ‘learning style’ such as visually, orally, or by doing - is not supported by evidence. Nonetheless the concept remains hugely popular, no doubt in part because learning via our preferred style can lead us to feel like we’ve learned more, even though we haven’t.’
Honey, P. And Mumford, A. (1982) Manual of Learning Styles, P Honey.
McLeod, S. A. (2017, October 24). Kolb - learning styles. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html