term paper on learning styles

Advertisement

The learning styles neuromyth: when the same term means different things to different teachers

• Open access
• Published: 03 July 2020
• Volume 36 , pages 511–531, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Marietta Papadatou-Pastou 1 ,
• Anna K. Touloumakos 1 , 2 ,
• Christina Koutouveli 1 &
• Alexia Barrable   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5352-8330 3  

16k Accesses

19 Citations

39 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Although learning styles (LS) have been recognised as a neuromyth, they remain a virtual truism within education. A point of concern is that the term LS has been used within theories that describe them using completely different notions and categorisations. This is the first empirical study to investigate education professionals’ conceptualisation, as well as means of identifying and implementing LS in their classroom. A sample of 123 education professionals were administered a questionnaire consisting both closed- and open-ended questions. Responses were analysed using thematic analysis. LS were found to be mainly conceptualised within the Visual-Auditory-(Reading)-Kinaesthetic (VAK/VARK) framework, as well as Gardner’s multiple intelligences. Moreover, a lot of education professionals confused theories of learning (e.g., behavioural or cognitive theories) with LS. In terms of identifying LS, educators reported using a variety of methods, spanning from observation and everyday contact to the use of tests. The ways LS were implemented in the classroom were numerous, comprising various teaching aids, participatory techniques and motor activities. Overall, we argue that the extended use of the term LS gives the illusion of a consensus amongst educators, when a closer examination reveals that the term LS is conceptualised, identified and implemented idiosyncratically by different individuals. This study aims to be of use to pre-service and in-service teacher educators in their effort to debunk the neuromyth of LS and replace it with evidence-based practices.

Similar content being viewed by others

Debunking the Neuromyth of Learning Style

Myth Busted or Zombie Concept? A Systematic Review of Articles Referencing “Learning Styles” from 2009 to 2019

Introduction—Theory into Practice

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Learning styles (LS) made an appearance in the 1950s, gained popularity in the 1970s and are still a virtual truism amongst educators (Coffield et al. 2004 ; Griffiths 2012 ). The concept behind them holds some intuitive appeal, and states that providing information through different, but individually specific, preferred modalities in instruction can improve learning. However, the concept has been heavily criticised (e.g., Krätzig and Arbuthnott 2006 ; Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2018 ; Pashler et al. 2008 ; Rohrer and Pashler 2012 ; Stahl 2002 ). The Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI), a strand of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), has recognised and categorised LS as a neuromyth (OECD 2002 ). The Education Endowment Foundation, which compiles research and evidence-based practice for teachers to use, characterises the evidence for LS as ‘very limited’ (Education Endowment Foundation 2019 , p1). Despite this widespread criticism, a great number of teachers still believe in LS (Dekker et al. 2012 ; Tardif et al. 2015 ; Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2017 ). The present study adds to the critical literature advocating against the use of LS in education, as it attempts to illustrate the fluidity of the concept and the applications of LS amongst education professionals.

A study into neuromyths in education has shown that more than 90% of teachers in the UK and Netherlands believe in the idea of a preferred mode of delivery (Dekker et al. 2012 ). A similar study in Portugal has found that the majority of teachers, upwards of 50%, believe in instruction tailored to LS (Rato et al. 2013 ), whilst 91% of Spanish teachers believe that student performance is enhanced by delivery of material in the individual’s preferred LS (Ferrero et al. 2016 ). In the context of Greece, which is where the current study took place, studies have shown that 97% of teachers believe in LS (Deligiannidi and Howard-Jones 2015 ), whilst the percentage for prospective teachers is 94% (Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2017 ). In addition, a review by a UK academic supports the idea that LS are still thriving in higher education (Newton 2015 ).

The intuitive appeal of LS rests in the reality that there are many differences amongst learners, as in special educational and additional needs (Warnock and Norwich 2005 ). Moreover, the fact that teachers should recognise such differences and accommodate them in their teaching is also well-documented (Jordan et al. 2009 ). In addition, there is now evidence to show that urging learners themselves to reflect upon their own ways of learning and develop learning strategies, such as metacognitive and self-regulation skills, can be very effective in improving learning (Dinsmore et al. 2008 ). What the LS literature has done, however, is take the reality that not all learners are the same, and build a quasi-scientific literature around it. A whole industry is in fact built around the identification and quantification of such LS (Coffield et al. 2004 ). The adoption of the LS myth has probably also proliferated as it implies that everyone can learn well, as long as the to-be-leant information matches their preferred LS.

This adoption of LS comes at a heavy cost. Some LS programmes come with a hefty price tag, potentially taking away funding from other, more useful and effective practices (Adey and Dillon 2012 ). The Educational Endowment Foundation (EEF 2017 ) reported that LS are not just an innocent misconception but can be harmful through the assignment of learners to groups or categories on the basis of a supposed LS. If individuals are categorised according to LS, the danger looms that this can lead to the assumption of fixed or rigid learning styles, which can demotivate students from adapting, let alone seeking new challenges (Education Endowment Foundation 2017 ). Moreover, adopting LS could limit the modes of presentation of material for certain students, leading to diminished opportunities to learn (Coffield et al. 2004 ). Learning Styles have indeed often be used in unhelpful ways by teachers, more as a way of classifying and labelling learners, rather than in a constructive way to enrich learning experiences (Franklin 2006 ). Furthermore, the complexity of learning can become simplified and trivialised, whilst scholarship and research literacy within education as a profession dangerously compromised (Sharp et al. 2008 ). The LS philosophy also encourages teachers to teach to their pupils’ intellectual strengths, leaving little opportunity for students to work on their shortcomings and develop strategies to cope with them. According to a letter signed by thirty world-renowned professors of Neuroscience, Psychology and Education, ‘Learning styles can create a false dimension of individuals’ abilities, leading to expectations and excuses that are detrimental to learning in general’ (Hood et al. 2017 ).

Criticism of LS as a scientific concept mainly hinges upon four different strands: firstly, the proliferation of LS models, namely the fact that there are more than 70 distinct constructs referred to as LS (Coffield et al. 2004 ). This results in LS being a term everyone can relate to, although they are often referring to different constructs. This lack of shared understanding is the main area of focus of this paper. Secondly, the lack of scientific basis supporting the rationale behind LS (Coffield et al. 2004 ; Henry 2010 ; Kraemer et al. 2009 ; Pashler et al. 2008 ). Thirdly, the lack of evidence to support LS use in the classroom and their potential downsides if used to guide instruction (Coffield et al. 2004 ; Rohrer and Pashler 2012 ; Stahl 2002 ). Finally, the lack of validity and reliability of assessment tools for LS (Adey and Dillon 2012 ; Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2018 ).

As stated above, a serious problem with the rationale behind LS is that so many different LS models have been proposed, that the term has expanded to mean different things to different people. As an illustration, in their 2004 review, Coffield et al. ( 2004 ) identified 71 of LS models, even though only 13 of them were considered to be dominant. Some of them include Honey and Mumford ( 1992 ) and Dunn and Dunn (Dunn 1990 ), whilst many researchers would include various instruments and theories such as Apter’s Motivational Style Profile (Apter et al. 1998 ), Riding’s Cognitive Styles Analysis (Peterson et al. 2003 ), Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles (Vermunt 1994 ) and Gardner’s multiple intelligences (Gardner 1992 ). The sheer number of conflicting LS instruments and theories out there proposes a great deal of conflicting ideas about learning and the optimal techniques to facilitate it. It is not known to date which of those ideas and techniques are actually endorsed by education professionals and how, but given the proliferation of constructs covered by the term LS, it is possible that there may be confusion amongst educators with regard to the term.

Not only are the LS models numerous, but also the very notion of ‘Learning Styles’ lacks consistent terminology. The most commonly found terms in the literature are ‘Cognitive styles’, ‘Learning Styles’ and ‘Learning Strategy’ (Cassidy 2004 ; Curry 1990 ). For example, Cassidy ( 2004 , pp. 420–421) describes an individual’s cognitive style as ‘a combination of psychological, cognitive and affective characteristics that facilitate each individual to interplay in his or her educational environment’. According to Dunn et al. ( 2002 , p. 75), LS are considered to be ‘a biologically and developmentally imposed set of personal characteristics that make the same teaching method effective for some and ineffective for others’. Curry ( 1990 , p. 2) refers to learning strategy as a ‘cross-situational consistency in how students approach school learning’. Most of these definitions are used interchangeably, so as to maintain the nuances between controversial theories.

When it comes to the evidence for the effectiveness of the LS model, a review of 17 studies conducted in 1993 came back with mixed results on the matching of LS and instructional strategies (Hayes and Allinson 1993 ). A more recent review of the literature reached the conclusion that there was a lack of sufficient experimental backing of LS (Pashler et al. 2008 ). Indeed, only a handful of systematic studies have been performed to challenge the effectiveness of the practice of delivering materials in different modalities for enhanced performance in the classroom, all of them failing to support the LS premises (Krätzig and Arbuthnott 2006 ; Willingham et al. 2015a , b ). As an illustration, one recent experimental study investigated the effect of LS preference to performance, as related to a comprehension exercise (Rogowsky et al. 2015 ). After establishing each adult’s preferred LS through a standardised inventory, participants were offered a verbal comprehension aptitude test in both oral and written forms. Furthermore, participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups, where they received the same material in two different modes (auditory or visual). Results showed there was no statistical significance in the relationship between learning style preference (auditory or visual) and learning aptitude. Written comprehension tests were taken by both groups, immediately and two weeks later. LS preference, delivery mode and performance in the test failed to show any statistically significant relationship.

Whilst perhaps grounded in neuroscientific findings, for example, that bimodal processing of the same information can have an additive effect (Geake 2004 ; Calvert et al. 2001 ), the emphasis should be on connectedness of brain factions, rather than separateness (Geake 2008 ). This premise of separateness, as promoted by LS theory, is scientifically incorrect (Adey and Dillon 2012 ). Moreover, evidence for the benefits for multi-modal learning directly counteracts the idea that a single, preferred mode should be chosen (Kress 2000 ).

With regard to the last strand of criticism, the lack of validity and reliability of measurement tools, it has been shown that the psychometric properties, such as the test-retest reliability and the internal consistency of 13 popular LS tests are not sufficient (Coffield et al. 2004 ). This is actually to be expected given that such properties refer to the coherence and stability of a measure (reliability) as well as the appropriateness of the structure and content of a measure based on its operationalisation (validity). Thus, it would be surprising that measures of constructs that have been partially theorised and poorly operationalised present evidence for good psychometric properties. Another drawback in terms of measurement is that the LS classifications amongst individuals in classrooms are usually based on self-reports, as for example in Edmund’s Learning Style Identification exercise (Reinert 1976 ) and in The Learning Style Profile (Keefe and Monks 1986 ) or based on teacher identification through observation (Graf and Liu 2009 ; Cassidy 2004 ). Marcus ( 1977 ) looked at teacher and student assessment on various areas of learning preferences, termed LS in the article. These areas included study conditions (lighting, sound, etc.), motivation styles and visual, auditory and kinaesthetic preferences. The data revealed little consensus between teacher- and self-assessment. A recent study that collected information on the LS (visual, auditory or kinaesthetic) of 199 fifth- and sixth-grade students by self-report and by teacher-report and failed to find any relationship between the two assessments (Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2018 ).

The current study was designed to contribute to the body of empirical evidence in relation to the first strand of criticism of LS, namely the multicurrency and ultimately the fluidity of what the term LS means and how this might translate into educational practices. Νo systematic investigation to date has addressed this question. More specifically, our main aim was to further and deepen our understanding of teachers’ conceptualisation, identification and use (if any) of the LS construct in practice, drawing on their everyday experience. To achieve this, the following research questions were devised and pursued:

RQ1. What do teachers refer to by the term LS, including what are the main categories of LS they identify?

RQ2. By what means do teachers identify the LS of their students in their classroom practice?

RQ3. How do LS inform and shape teaching practice to enable students to learn?

A qualitative approach was employed in order to assess teachers’ knowledge of the concept of ‘Learning Styles’ and map their use in practice. Whilst the richness of the method of data generation was an important guide for the selected research process, rigour was deemed equally important. To this end, a questionnaire comprising primarily open-ended questions was thought to meet the primary criteria for both breadth and depth of understanding of teachers’ knowledge and practices. Open-ended questions aimed at gathering unsolicited responses on what teachers know about and how they understand, conceptualise and use what is called ‘Learning Styles’ in their teaching practice. Open-ended questions thus allow participants to voice their own views spontaneously (see O'Cathain and Thomas 2004 ), hence not fitting their views on the researchers’ pre-decided and pre-determined categories, as with closed questions. Such an approach, in turn, allowed for a rich account of participants’ views and a data corpus of considerable length. Findings emerged through the use of the analytic procedures outlined in thematic analysis (indicatively Frith and Gleeson 2004 ).

Participants

Participants were attendees of a Special Education year-long seminar, taking place in the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece. A total number of 217 participants was drawn; 123 of them formed the final sample following the inclusion criterion of having had at least 1 year of teaching experience. In particular, 56.4% of the participants had between 1 and 5 years of teaching experience, 21.8% had between 5 and 10 years of teaching experience and 21.8% had 10 years of teaching experience or more. Τhe age range was between 20 and 52 years ( M= 30,3, SD = 8,26). The majority of the participants (87%) worked as educators (specialisations included English, French, Music, Physics, Math, Special Ed, Theology, Philology, Early Childhood Education). The remaining 10.5% of the participants who had experience with teaching worked in social sciences (psychology and social anthropology, 6.5%) or other professions (4% in graphic design and interpretation); 2.5% were university students.

The project was reviewed and received full ethical approval (Ref. No: 1616/12.03.2019) from the host institution. Participants were briefed and given the opportunity to ask questions in relation to the study. They were guaranteed anonymity and confidentiality; their right to withdraw at any given point with no consequences whatsoever was further made clear to them. Participation was voluntary and participants were informed that they were free to decline participation if they wished.

Data generation materials

The questionnaire was compiled by the authors of the present study and included questions on demographics (sex, age, education and teaching experience), closed questions (‘Do you know of the learning styles?’, with response options comprising of ‘Yes’, ‘No’, ‘Don’t know/Don’t wish to answer’ ‘I have heard about LS, but do not know much’; ‘Where did you learn about learning styles?’ with response options comprising of ‘At University’, ‘Through colleagues’, ‘Through media/press’, ‘Through books’, ‘Through scientific papers’, ‘Other’) and open-ended questions (‘How many learning styles exist and which are they?’, ‘Do you use these learning styles in your classroom / teaching? If so, in what ways? Give examples.’, ‘Do you think that students learn better when they receive information in their own learning style?’, ‘Do you think students show a preference for how they learn?’, ‘How do you recognise the learning style of each student?’).

Paper-and-pencil administration of the questionnaire took place during the seminar, before participants were introduced to the body of research that is critical towards LS. Completion of questionnaires lasted about 15–20 min. Prior to administration, participants were briefed, asked questions and then signed the consent forms.

Data analysis

Thematic analysis.

A top-down approach, through the use of thematic analysis, was employed, following the principle that thematic analysis can be used with both deductive and inductive methodologies (Braun and Clarke 2006 ; Frith and Gleeson 2004 ). Rules for code development were devised first. In line with these rules, categories had to be (a) mutually exclusive and exhaustive—data chunks would have to fit under only one category; (b) appropriate—organised in appropriate units of analysis; (c) systematic—systematically following the analytical hierarchies deriving from the data (for example groups of themes, themes and subthemes) and (d) theoretically relevant and comprehensive—enabling the theoretical understanding on teacher’s knowledge and use of LS. The mechanics of thematic analysis were judged to be useful for this exploration, and were adapted (aligning to the guidelines of Miles and Huberman 1994 ) so that four sequential steps were followed: (a) data reduction, (b) data display/code key, (c) identification of themes and (d) links between themes in order to address the research questions (see Table 1 for an illustration of steps (a) and (b), and Table 2 for an illustration of steps (c) and (d)).

Indeed, as evident from the two examples in Table 1 , from respondents’ quotations, we moved to data reduction (step (a)), that then directly informed the codes selected (step (b)). Then themes were identified (step (c)) by clarifying the properties of emergent codes and by considering them in combinations with one another. For example, in the case of the codes ‘Informed by VA(R)K and Gardner’, ‘Informed by VA(R)K (fewer or more categories) and Gardner’, the identified theme Learning Taxonomies was chosen because all of the categories identified drew from the typical taxonomies encountered in the LS discourse. This theme, in the end, comprised two more categories (for a full account, see “Analysis” section under RQ1). This iterative process was employed for each of the three RQs.

Validity/inter-rater agreement

The final coding scheme developed served as the means to explore inter-rater (inter-coder in this instance) agreement (Kirilenko and Stepchenkova 2016 ). One of the authors who was entirely blind to the data analysis process was invited to act as the second rater. The responses in the excel database were given to the researcher (who randomly selected 10% of them) along with the coding scheme with the instruction to assign codes to responses. The percentage of agreement between the two coders across the categories developed ranged between 79% and 100%. These results indicate, at least, substantial agreement between coders (McHugh 2012 ).

The analysis yielded three different coding keys, one for each of three research questions under investigation. In line with this, evidence distilled is presented here in three sections, each corresponding to one of the three research questions.

RQ1: What do teachers refer to by the term LS, including what are the main categories of LS they identify?

With regard to teachers’ understanding of LS, we coded responses to those with reference to the literature and to those that just seemed to be common sense. In the first instance, codes assigned were those encountered in known LS taxonomies, learning theories and approaches (see indicatively Coffield et al. 2004 ; Fleming and Mills 1992 ). Table 3 summarises the categories that emerged through analyses. As seen, responses with reference to learning styles taxonomies and/or other taxonomies almost exclusively drew from those of VAK/VARK modalities and the corresponding learning styles, as in participant 189 and participant 46 (Barbe et al. 1979 ; Fleming and Baume 2006 ; Fleming and Mills 1992 ) as well as from Gardner’s ( 1992 ) multiple intelligences; categories that emerged comprised either all of or single categories of these taxonomies or combinations of categories from these two, as in participant 31.

P189 Auditory, visual, kinaesthetic learning profile ( Aκουστικό, οπτικό, κιναισθητικό προφίλ μάθησης ) P46 I don’t have knowledge of all, but of those that help us learn through our senses: visual, auditory, kinaesthetic. ( Δε γνωρίζω για όλους, αλλά αυτούς που μας βοηθούν να μαθαίνουμε με τις αισθήσεις: οπτικός, ακουστικός, κιναισθητικός ) P31 There are many different learning styles, according to the principles of multiple intelligences. These are categorized according to our basic senses: sight, hearing, touch and movement. ( Υπάρχουν διαφορετικοί τύποι μάθησης σύμφωνα με τις αρχές της πολλαπλής νοημοσύνης. Αυτές κατηγοριοποιούνται με βάση τις βασικές μας αισθήσεις: όραση, ακοή, αφή, κίνηση )

In addition, LS were often mistaken for key aspects of different theories of learning, as seen in participant 52 (e.g. behavioural and cognitive theories), learning approaches (e.g. collaborative learning), and other theories (e.g. motivation theories), or combinations thereof, like in the case of participant 195. The few common sense categories identified (for example ‘audio reading’), were those that could not fit under any of the theoretical categories mentioned, for example participant 104.

P52 The two main learning categories are behaviourism (students associate a certain stimulus with what they have to learn each time) and cognitive (information is built upon already existing information). ( Οι δυο βασικές κατηγορίες μάθησης είναι η συμπεριφορική (οι μαθητές συσχετίζουν ένα συγκεκριμένο ερέθισμα κάθε φορά με αυτό που πρέπει να μάθουνε) και η γνωστική (οι πληροφορίες συσχετίζονται με τις ήδη προϋπάρχουσες. ). P195 Behaviourist, cognitive, developmental, evolutionary ( Συμπεριφορική, γνωστική, αναπτυξιακή, εξελικτική. ) P104 In my opinion: 1) imitations, 2) experience 3) study (repetition) 4) through pictures ( κατά τη γνώμη μου :1) μίμηση , 2) βίωμα , 3) μελέτη ( επανάληψη ), 4) μέσα από εικόνες )

In this second area of exploration, analysis yielded five main categories of means and approaches by which teachers identify their students’ LS (see Table 4 ). These primarily involved some informal means such as observing (how and what) and connecting/communicating with the students (as with participant 137), but also some more formal experiential means as well as typical measurement and evaluation methods. The most prevalent responses were those involving direct observation of students’ behaviour ( as with Participants 43, 47, and 218, below). Teachers reported that they focus on how students actively engage with the material (i.e., process/learn, concentrate, remember, read, describe, solve problems), as with P43 for example, or respond to practices (i.e., to techniques aiming at different sensory channels , or how they behave when teachers lecture), as with participants 47 and 218 for example, and how they interact with others (i.e., collaborate, participate, communicate). Similarly, teachers make notes of students of what suits, moves, bores, puzzles and enables students. Moreover, they spend time learning more about students through everyday contact and communication, as well as via exploratory questions addressed to the students and their closed ones and by taking their history.

P137 Through everyday contact and communication, you get to perceive through their work and how they respond to changes in how you teach (from traditional to more experiential)... ( Με την καθημερινή επαφή το αντιλαμβάνεσαι μέσα από τις εργασίες τους και από τον τρόπο που αντιδρούν όταν αλλάζεις τρόπο προσέγγισης του μαθήματος (από παραδοσιακό τρόπο-> ενεργητικό και βιωματικό-)… ) P43 Employing different exercises and different teaching aids. I observe how the students process the information, and whether s/he perceives it... ( Με ασκήσεις και εποπτικό υλικό που χρησιμοποιώ. Βλέπω πώς το παιδί επεξεργάζεται την πληροφορία και αν τελικά την αντιλαμβάνεται… ) P47 Employing different teaching methods. The educator, observes (via questions) how the student responds, what s/he assimilated and what s/he learnt, what interests him/her during the lecture and if s/he seems interested or bored and indifferent. ( Χρησιμοποιώντας διάφορους τρόπους μάθησης. Ο εκπαιδευτικός βλέπει ρωτώντας πως ανταποκρίθηκε ο μαθητής, τι αποκόμισε, τι έμαθε, βλέπει επίσης το ενδιαφέρον του κατά την παράδοση εάν προσέχει ή εάν βαριέται και δεν δίνει σημασία .) P218 From the way the student receives and assimilates information, e.g. can s/he memorize a text by just listening to it. By the interest s/he shows to the given activity, e.g. showing preference for motor activities and not to sedentary ones. ( Aπό τον τρόπο με τον οποίο δέχεται και αφομοιώνει τις πληροφορίες π.χ. αποστηθίζει κείμενο ακούγοντας το. Από το ενδιαφέρον που δείχνει στην εκάστοτε δραστηριότητα π.χ. προτίμηση στις κινητικές δραστηριότητες και όχι στις καθιστικές. )

Typical measurement and evaluation approaches, from in-class assessment and participation to the use of psychometrics, and more experiential methods, such as test/trials with different approaches and play, are some additional sources of information according to teachers.

P152 Through everyday contact, you get to perceive this, through their assignments, their response when you change your approach (from traditional to more active and experiential) often the students get to ask for themselves, how they like the class, what it is that you should offer them… In addition often times you see that they are bored! and this rings a bell for you to look and find ‘how would the children learn’ and not what and how much they will learn! It’s not just about the quantity! but the approach and the quality of the educator’s teaching. ( Με την καθημερινή επαφή, το αντιλαμβάνεσαι μέσα από τις εργασίες τους και από τον τρόπο που αντιδρούν όταν αλλάζεις τρόπο προσέγγισης του μαθήματος (από παραδοσιακό τρόπο-> ενεργητικό και βιωματικό-…) πολλές φορές στο ζητάνε τα ίδια τα παιδιά πώς τους αρέσει στο μάθημα, τι να τους δίνεις στο μάθημα... Επίσης πολλές φορές τους βλέπεις ότι βαριούνται! και αυτό είναι καμπανάκι να ψάξεις να βρεις ‘πώς να μάθουν τα παιδιά’ και όχι τι και πόσα θα μάθουν! Δεν αρκεί μόνο η ποσότητα! αλλά ο τρόπος και η ποιότητα της διδασκαλίας του εκπαιδευτικού. )

RQ3. How do LS inform and shape teaching practice to enable students learn?

Five clusters of various uses of LS in teaching practices emerged through the analyses of teachers’ responses (see Table 5 ). Unsurprisingly, and in line with the most commonly referred to categorisation of LS—namely VA(R)K presented earlier—teachers referred variably to practices that embed audiovisual aids ranging from pictures, videos, other ICT and interactive boards—as with participant 46, to even more nuanced use of aids, such as voice colouring and hand clapping (to hear the rhythm)—as with P157. In recounting the categories yielded through analysis, one realises the breadth of aids teachers call up when in practice.

P46 They are used not compartmentalised but in combination. For example a video or a power-point with embedded sound… (Xρησιμοποιούνται όχι αποσπασματικά και ένας κάθε φορά, αλλά συνδυαστικά. Παράδειγμα ένα βίντεο ή powerpoint με ήχο…) P157 Auditory: creating poems through rhythm or rhymes. Maybe by combining with hand-finger clapping, visual: with sketches, graphs. When needed, I make them right there and then to make the transition or the progression of what I want to student to perceive obvious. ( Aκουστικός: δημιουργώντας ποιηματάκια με ρυθμό ή ομοιοκαταληξία. Ίσως συνδυάζοντας και με χτυπήματα δαχτύλων-χεριών, οπτικός: με σκίτσα, σχεδιαγράμματα. Όταν χρειάζεται τα φτιάχνω εκείνη τη στιγμή για να φανεί η αλλαγή ή η εξέλιξη αυτού που θέλω να αντιληφθεί ο μαθητής )

The use of a wide range of motor materials and activities was reported too (ranging from the use of plasticine and floor rulers to kinaesthetic/sensory play and dramatisation)—as with participant 162. Similarly, participatory and other methods (ranging from group and other explorative activities, experiments, projects, visits, to personalised teaching, interdisciplinarity, and teacher- and student-centred teaching) was an additional category that emerged based on teachers’ responses; an example is that of participant 186. Prevalent tools reported included the use of reinforcement and punishment, Q & As, dialogues and revisions and some approaches not fitting under the previous clusters, including using various stimuli and drawing on/assessing existing knowledge.

P162 ...for the kinaesthetic type I will use means such as plasticine, we will engage in interactive play, we will dance. ( Στον κιναισθητικό μαθητή θα χρησιμοποιήσω εργαλεία όπως η πλαστελίνη, θα παίξουμε με διαδραστικά παιχνίδια, θα χορέψουμε. ) P186 Group activities, experiential method, interdisciplinary approach, project, ( Δημιουργία ομάδων, βιωματική μέθοδος, διαθεματική προσέγγιση, project. )

Figure 1 features the interrelation suggested here between the three parts as well as the diverse patterns of themes that emerged through the analyses.

Schematic representation of the interrelation between the three parts: LS conceptualisation, identification and LS-based classroom practices

The present study aimed to investigate, in an empirical fashion, how the term LS is conceptualised by education professionals as well as how LS are identified and implemented within the classroom. To date, only anecdotal accounts exist supporting that LS is a term used flexibly, resulting in it representing different ideas and definitions for different people and subsequently resulting in varying ways of practically implementing the LS theory. In order to empirically investigate this question for the first time, a qualitative approach was employed, which gave rich data coming from 123 educators. Thematic analysis was used for the analysis of participants’ responses.

According to our analysis, teachers in our sample responded comfortably to our questions about LS, as indicated by the very few instances of missing responses, as well as the richness of the responses, suggesting a familiarity with the term. This familiarity, however, did not translate to a uniform view of LS. This is not to say that there have not been patterns in their responses. In fact, we did encounter a good amount of responses indicating that teachers conceptualise and understand LS primarily within the Visual-Auditory-(Reading)-Kinaesthetic (VAK/VARK) modalities framework (Barbe et al. 1979 ; Fleming and Baume 2006 ; Fleming and Mills 1992 ), and secondarily within Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory (1992). Of note, the second richest repository of ideas respondents drew on in their conceptualisation of LS included theories of learning, other theories (for example motivation, developmental theories) and elements of learning approaches. However, and whilst known categories from aforementioned taxonomies, theories and approaches were identified in many cases, more were the respondents that selectively chose and combined such categories. Therefore, on the one hand, the overlap between theories was considerable (especially learning theories, learning approaches and LS), which suggests that teachers confused LS for theories and approaches, such as behaviourism and collaborative learning; on the other hand, the confusion within theories, approaches and models was considerable: teachers would not uniformly draw on one theory or model but rather ‘mix and match’. Arguably, categories presented so far corroborate the considerable expansion of the LS term to other diverse and distinct theoretical constructs. This finding, together with the stretch of the construct to fit what are only ‘common sense’ categories, suggests an entirely unsystematised view of LS. In other words, the term seems to mean different things to different people.

This article, therefore, not only adds to the criticism of LS as a term that applies to diverse and unrelated constructs (Coffield et al. 2004 ) but also aims to give a clear snapshot of the various theorisations and misconceptions that exist in relation to them. This is useful for both researchers and practitioners, and has implications for teacher education, both pre- and in-service. Having an idea of the current misconceptions that exist can inform teacher education programmes in how to tackle the issues of neuromyths, in this case the persistent use of LS in teaching practice.

As teachers further offer a detailed account of methods they have in place for identifying students’ LS, spanning from observation of how the students perform different task (e.g., concentrate, behave during a lecture) and observation of what interests, suits, motivates or bores students, to using in-class assessment and exercises, teacher education can focus on providing appropriate evidence-based strategies that can replace LS. Findings show that some teachers also make use of experiential methods, such as play and trial/testing, or rely on their everyday communication with the students or the students' caretakers. Evidence on how teachers conceptualise and identify LS inform in turn the implementation of strategies and techniques teachers mobilise to teach what they consider an LS-informed classroom. In particular, a host of audiovisual and teaching aids (including interactive boards, computers, grammar rules and prep, to voice colouring) were recounted by participants, as well as participatory techniques (including experiments, group activities and visits), typical learning tools (such as dialogue and Q&A sessions), motor activities (including sensory play, dance or use of floor ruler) or other methods such as engaging in new experiences. The methods recounted by teachers in our sample exceed dramatically what one would have expected to see in terms of numbers and variability of responses had the teachers focused on catering students LS based on one or two specific LS models.

Of note here is that the evidence generated through this research suggests a linear and strong link between LS conceptualisation and identification and LS-informed teaching practices. The responses identified in the question about LS teaching practices, aligned, in some cases perfectly, with the way teachers mentioned they conceptualise LS as well as go about identifying LS in their practice. Whilst the responses that the participants gave in each of the questions addressing the three research questions were congruent with each other, consistency was not reached amongst participants in terms of LS conceptualisation and LS in practice. In other words, whilst there was within-subject agreement, the conceptualisation between subjects was hugely divergent.

Furthermore, the extended use of the term LS gives the illusion of a consensus amongst education professionals. However, a closer examination reveals that the term LS is not only conceptualised idiosyncratically by different teachers, but that LS are also identified and implemented in that way. To conclude, different educators mean different things when they talk about and work with LS. This lack of true consensus may be attributed to the number of different approaches that are all considered to describe LS. The fluidity of the concept of LS both in terms of conceptualisation and implementation adds to the other criticisms that LS are facing: lack of a scientific rationale behind the development of the LD theory(ies), lack of empirical evidence for their effectiveness and lack of valid and reliable measurement tools.

The present study relied exclusively on the self-reports of teachers. This is a limitation to our study with regard to how they implement LS within their classrooms that could be addressed in the future by direct classroom observations. Future studies could, moreover, take this exploration forward in different directions. First, a study with a small number of interviewees could be used to solidify the coding scheme and offer a respondent validation purposes. Second, a replication study with substantially large samples of teachers could provide evidence on how many of them conceptualise, identify and/or use LS in the ways that were identified here, hence enhancing the credibility of our results through triangulation. Third, a survey incorporating elements of existing LS taxonomies including the ones found here could be used to investigate which of these elements teachers know and how much they know about them. The two latter studies would be beneficial in helping to plan the provision of targeted continuous professional development for teachers, aimed at resolving misconceptions and providing evidence-based approaches to teaching differentiation.

Based on our findings, we would like to strongly support previously voiced recommendations for the adoption of evidence-based approaches within educational contexts and the abandonment of practices that not only lack evidence, but additionally may be harmful to learners (Geake 2008 ; Lilienfeld et al. 2011 ). Indeed, adoption of neuromyths in education, of which LS is one, contains many pitfalls. With only limited resources in education, neuromyths could be diverting such resources away from more valuable and evidence-based practices (Pasquinelli 2012 ; Sylvan and Christodoulou 2010 ). In addition to financial resources, the adoption of neuromyths wastes time and energy (Willingham et al. 2015a , b ). It further diverts teachers from evidence-based practices they could employ in their teaching. Last, adoption of neuromyths reveals a lack of critical and research skills.

A concerted effort has been made in the last several years to identify teachers’ misconceptions and debunk such neuromyths within educational practice. A series of articles have explored the issue of teacher misinformation and the prevalence of neuromyths amongst teachers (Dekker et al. 2012 ; Deligiannidi and Howard-Jones 2015 ; Ferrero et al. 2016 ) as well as trainee teachers (Howard-Jones et al. 2009 ; Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2017 ), as presented in the introduction. Whilst this has been taking place, articles in the mainstream media have also attempted to debunk LS and dissuade teachers from using non-evidenced-based practices in classroom (Henry 2010 ). Moreover, several proposals have been made by researchers and teacher educators on incorporating neuroscience and cognitive psychology modules within formal teacher education (Goswami 2004 ; Hille 2011 ; Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2017 ). In addition to debunking neuromyths, such as LS, providing teachers with alternative, but evidence-based pedagogies, could be of use. Such pedagogies could include ‘learning to learn’ or ‘learning skills’ interventions that focus on metacognitive skills and self-regulation of learning. These techniques have been shown to be effective and have a high impact on student attainment in several systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Bangert-Drowns et al. 2004 ; Hattie et al. 1996 ; Sitzmann and Ely 2011 ).

In conclusion, this is the first study to empirically investigate how LS are conceptualised, identified as well as applied within the classroom. It showed in a robust way that the concept of LS is understood differently by different educators and that the LS of the students are identified by their teachers in varied ways. Furthermore, our study showcased that the implementation of LS theory in the classroom rests upon the educator, resulting in a multiple of different ways in which LS are implemented. This level of variability in responses as well as in the emerged themes across the three research questions in this study suggests that the concept of LS can fit so much that renders its theoretical delineation impossible and its meaningful use in practice the least questionable. Therefore, the present study adds to the growing body of evidence that is sceptical of the LS literature (Coffield et al. 2004 ; Curry 1990 ; Franklin 2006 ; Papadatou-Pastou et al. 2018 ; Pashler et al. 2008 ), as it showed that the term LS is used in an idiosyncratic way by educators, resulting in a lack of consensus amongst them on what LS actually mean and how they should be identified and implemented. This article should provide a starting point for professionals working within Initial Teacher Education, as well as in continuous professional development in order to selectively target misconceptions in relation to LS, whilst at the same time providing evidence-based alternatives for differentiation. We hereby add to the many voices that support the abandonment of the use of LS in education.

Adey, P., & Dillon, J. (2012). Bad education: Debunking myths in education . Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill Education.

Google Scholar  

Apter, M. J., Mallows, R., & Williams, S. (1998). The development of the motivational style profile. Personality and Individual Differences, 24 (1), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00148-7 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Hurley, M. M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effects of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74 ( 1 ), 29–58. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001029 .

Barbe, W. B., Swassing, R. H., & Milone, M. N. (1979). Teaching through modality strengths: Concepts and practices (Reprinted ed.) . Columbus, OH: Zaner-Bloser.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa .

Calvert, G. A., Hansen, P. C., Iversen, S. D., & Brammer, M. J. (2001). Detection of audio-visual integration sites in humans by application of electrophysiological criteria to the BOLD effect. Neuroimage, 14 (2), 427–438. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.0812 .

Cassidy, S. (2004). Learning styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures. Educational Psychology, 24 (4), 419–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341042000228834 .

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 London, UK. http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv:13692 . Retrieved April 12, 2019.

Curry, L. (1990). A critique of the research on learning styles. Educational Leadership, 48 (2), 50–56.

Dekker, S., Lee, N. C., Howard-Jones, P., & Jolles, J. (2012). Neuromyths in education: Prevalence and predictors of misconceptions among teachers. Frontiers in Psychology, 3 , 429. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00429 .

Deligiannidi, K., & Howard-Jones, P. (2015). The neuroscience literacy of teachers in Greece. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174 , 3909–3915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.1133 .

Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20 (4), 391–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6 .

Dunn, R. (1990). Understanding the Dunn and Dunn learning styles model and the need for individual diagnosis and prescription. Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 6 (3), 223–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/0748763900060303 .

Dunn, R., Beaudry, J. S., & Klavas, A. (2002). Survey of research on learning styles. California Journal of Science Education, 2 (2), 75–98.

Education Endowment Foundation (2017). Learning Styles . https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/teaching-learning-toolkit/learning-styles/ . Retrieved April 12, 2019.

Educational Endowment Foundation (2019). Teaching and learning toolkit: Learning Styles available at https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/pdf/generate/?u=https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/pdf/toolkit/?id=136&t=Teaching%20and%20Learning%20Toolkitande=136&s

Ferrero, M., Garaizar, P., & Vadillo, M. A. (2016). Neuromyths in education: Prevalence among Spanish teachers and an exploration of cross-cultural variation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10 , 496. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00496 .

Fleming, N., & Baume, D. (2006). Learning Styles again: VARKing up the right tree! Educational Developments, 7 , 4–7 http://www.johnsilverio.com/EDUI6702/Fleming_VARK_learningstyles.pdf .

Fleming, N. D., & Mills, C. (1992). Helping students understand how they learn. The teaching professor, 7(4) . Madison, Wisconsin, USA: Magma Publications.

Franklin, S. (2006). VAKing out learning styles—why the notion of ‘learning styles’ is unhelpful to teachers. Education, 3-13, 34 (1), 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270500507644 .

Frith, H., & Gleeson, K. (2004). Clothing and embodiment: men managing body image and appearance. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 5 (1), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.5.1.40 .

Gardner, H. (1992). Multiple intelligences (Vol. 5, p. 56) . Minnesota: Minnesota Center for Arts Education.

Geake, J. (2004). How children’s brains think: Not left or right but both together. Education 3-13, 32 (3), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270485200351 .

Geake, J. (2008). Neuromythologies in education. Educational Research, 50 (2), 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880802082518 .

Goswami, U. (2004). Neuroscience and education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74 (Pt 1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904322848798 .

Graf, S., & Liu, T.-C. (2009). Supporting teachers in identifying students’ learning styles in learning management systems: An automatic student modelling approach. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 3–14.

Griffiths, C. (2012). Learning styles: Traversing the quagmire. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for Language Learning (pp. 151–168). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996). Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66 (2), 99–136. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170605 .

Hayes, J., & Allinson, C. W. (1993). Matching learning style and instructional strategy: An application of the person environment interaction paradigm. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76 (1), 63–79. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1993.76.1.63 .

Henry, J. (2010). Professor pans’ learning style’ teaching method. The Telegraph . http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1558822/Professor-pans-learning-style-teaching-method.html . Retrieved April 12,2019.

Hille, K. (2011). Bringing research into educational practice: Lessons learned. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5 (2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2011.01111.x .

Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1992). The manual of learning styles . Berkshire: Peter Honey Publications.

Hood, B., Howard-Jones, P., Laurillard, D., Bishop, D., Coffield, F., Frith, D. U., et al. (2017). No evidence to back idea of learning styles. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/12/no-evidence-to-back-idea-of-learning-styles . Retrieved April 12, 2019

Howard-Jones, P. A., Franey, L., Mashmoushi, R. & Liao, Y.-C. (2009) The neuroscience literacy of trainee teachers, at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference (University of Manchester) Retrieved April 12, 2019, http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/185140.pdf .

Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2009). Preparing teachers for inclusive classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 (4), 535–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.010 .

Keefe, J. W., & Monks, J. S. (1986). Learning Style profile: Examiner’s manual . Reston, VA: Reston Publishing.

Kirilenko, A. P., & Stepchenkova, S. (2016). Inter-coder agreement in one-to-many classification: Fuzzy kappa. PloS one, 11 (3), e0149787. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149787 .

Kraemer, D. J., Rosenberg, L. M., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2009). The neural correlates of visual and verbal cognitive styles. Journal of Neuroscience, 29 (12), 3792–3798. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4635-08.2009 .

Krätzig, G. P., & Arbuthnott, K. D. (2006). Perceptual learning style and learning proficiency: A test of the hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98 (1), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.238 .

Kress, G. (2000). Multimodality: Challenges to Thinking About Language. TESOL Quarterly, 34 (2), 337–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587959 .

Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2011). 50 great myths of popular psychology: Shattering widespread misconceptions about human behavior . Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Marcus, L. (1977). How teachers view student learning styles. NASSP Bulletin, 61 (408), 112–114.

McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia medica: 22 (3), 276-282, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2012.031

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Newton, P. M. (2015). The Learning Styles myth is thriving in Higher Education. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 , 1908. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01908 .

O'Cathain, A., & Thomas, K. J. (2004). “Any other comments?” Open questions on questionnaires–a bane or a bonus to research? BMC Medical Research Methodology, 4 (1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-4-25 .

OECD (2002). There is a visual, auditive and a haptic type of learning. http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/neuromyth3.htm . Accessed 15 April 2019.

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Haliou, E., & Vlachos, F. (2017). Brain knowledge and the prevalence of neuromyths among prospective teachers in Greece. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 , 804. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00804 .

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Gritzali, M., & Barrable, A. (2018). The Learning Styles educational neuromyth: Lack of agreement between teachers’ judgments, self-assessment, and students’ intelligence. Frontiers in Education, 3 , 105. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00105 .

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9 (3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x .

Pasquinelli, E. (2012). Neuromyths: Why do they exist and persist? Mind, Brain, and Education, 6 (2), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2012.01141.x .

Peterson, E. R., Deary, I. J., & Austin, E. J. (2003). The reliability of Riding’s cognitive style analysis test. Personality and Individual Differences, 34 (5), 881–891. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00116-2 .

Rato, J. R., Abreu, A. M., & Castro-Caldas, A. (2013). Neuromyths in education: What is fact and what is fiction for Portuguese teachers? Educational Research, 55 (4), 441–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2013.844947 .

Reinert, H. (1976). One picture is worth a thousand words? Not necessarily! The Modern Language Journal, 60 (4), 160–168. https://doi.org/10.2307/326308 .

Rogowsky, B. A., Calhoun, B. M., & Tallal, P. (2015). Matching learning style to instructional method: Effects on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107 (1), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037478 .

Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2012). Learning Styles: Where’s the evidence? Online Submission, 46 (7), 634–635. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04273.x .

Sharp, J. G., Bowker, R., & Byrne, J. (2008). VAK or VAK-uous? Towards the trivialisation of learning and the death of scholarship. Research Papers in Education, 23 (3), 293–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520701755416 .

Sitzmann, T., & Ely, K. (2011). A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: What we know and where we need to go. Psychological Bulletin, 137 (3), 421–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022777 .

Stahl, S. A. (2002). Different strokes for different folks? In L. Abbeduto (Ed.), Taking sides: Clashing on controversial issues in educational psychology . Guilford, CT: McGraw-Hill.

Sylvan, L. J., & Christodoulou, J. A. (2010). Understanding the role of neuroscience in brain based products: A guide for educators and consumers. Mind, Brain, and Education, 4 (1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2009.01077.x .

Tardif, E., Doudin, P. A., & Meylan, N. (2015). Neuromyths among teachers and student teachers. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9 ( 1 ), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12070 .

Vermunt, J. D. (1994). Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS) in higher education. Tilburg: University of Tilburg. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eappen_John2/post/Where_can_I_find_the_Vermunts_Inventory_of_Learning_Styles_ILS_English_Version_for_my_Research/attachment/59d63f0879197b807799b8a8/AS%3A426123554234372%401478607180503/download/Vermunt%27s+ILS-+120+scoring+Key.pdf . Retrieved 12 April 2019.

Warnock, M., & Norwich, B. (2005). Special educational needs: A new look . London: Continuum Publishing.

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

Willingham, D. T., Hughes, E. M., & Dobolyi, D. G. (2015b). The scientific status of learning styles theories. Teaching of Psychology, 42 (3), 266–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315589505 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece

Marietta Papadatou-Pastou, Anna K. Touloumakos & Christina Koutouveli

Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Athens Greece AND SKOPE Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Anna K. Touloumakos

University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK

Alexia Barrable

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexia Barrable .

Additional information

Marietta Papadatou-Pastou

Marietta Papadatou-Pastou is a neuropsychologist working as an Assistant Professor at the Department of Primary Education of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. Her research focuses on handedness and laterality, with an emphasis on the use of meta-analysis and functional transracial Doppler ultrasound. She is also interested in neuromyths in education and in developing an online support system using evidence-based techniques to support students in Higher Education who experience mild to moderate psychological and academic skills difficulties (MePlusMe). Some of her latest publications, which are relevant to Psychology of Education, include:

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Gritzali, M., & Barrable, A. (2018). Educational neuromyths using the case of learning styles: Lack of agreement between teachers’ judgments of their students’ Learning Styles, self-assessed Learning Styles, and students’ intelligence. Frontiers in Education: Educational Psychology, Doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00105

Ntolka, E., & Papadatou-Pastou, M. (2018). Right-handers have negligibly higher IQ scores than left-handers: Systematic review and meta-analyses. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 84, 376-393. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.08.007

Barrable, A., Papadatou-Pastou, M., & Tzotzoli, P. (2018). Supporting mental health, wellbeing and study skills in higher education: Αn online intervention system. International Journal of Mental Health Systems , 12 (1), 54. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-018-0233-z

Goozée, R., Papadatou-Pastou, M., Barley, E., Haddad, M., & Tzotzoli, P. (2018). Survey to inform the development of an online support system for higher education Students. Health, 10 (03), 351. Doi: https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.4236/health.2018.103028

Markou^, P., Ahtam, B., & Papadatou-Pastou, M. (2017). Elevated levels of atypical handedness in autism: Meta-analyses. Neuropsychology Review , 1-26. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-017-9354-4

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Haliou, E., & Vlachos, F. (2017). Brain knowledge and the prevalence of neuromyths among prospective teachers in Greece. Frontiers in Psychology: Educational Psychology, 8 , 804. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00804

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Goozee, R., Payne, E., Barrable, A., & Tzotzoli, P. (2017). A review of web-based support systems for students in higher education. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 11 (1), 59. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-017-0165-z

Papadatou-Pastou, M., & Sáfár, A. (2016). Handedness prevalence in the deaf: Meta-analyses. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 60 , 98-114. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.11.013

Touloumakos, A. K., Goozée, R., Papadatou-Pastou, M., Barley, E., Haddad, M., & Tzotzoli, P. (2016). Online support system for students in higher education: Proof-of-concept study. Digital Health, 2, 2055207616655012. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207616655012

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Goozée, R., Barley, E. A., Haddad, M., & Tzotzoli, P. (2015). Online intervention,‘MePlusMe’, supporting mood, wellbeing, study skills, and everyday functioning in students in higher education: A protocol for a feasibility study. BMC Pilot and Feasibility Studies , 1 (1), 1-10. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-015-0029-8

Papadatou-Pastou, M., & Tomprou, D. M. (2015). Intelligence and handedness: Meta-analyses of studies on intellectually disabled, typically developing and gifted individuals. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews, 56, 151-156, Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.06.017

Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P. M., Papastylianou, D., & Papadatou-Pastou, M. (2014). Ιmproving the school learning environment to reduce bullying: An experimental study. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research , 58 (4), 453-478. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.773556

Gilmore, C., & Papadatou-Pastou, M. (2009). Patterns of individual differences in conceptual understanding and arithmetical skill: A meta-analysis. Special Issue of Mathematical Thinking and Learning on “Young Children’s Understanding and Application of the Addition-Subtraction Inverse Principle” , 11(1), 25-40. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060802583923

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Martin, M., Munafò, M. R., & Jones, G. V. (2008). Sex differences in left-handedness: A meta-analysis of 144 studies, Psychological Bulletin, 134(5), 677-99. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012814

Anna K. Touloumakos currenlty works with children in institutional care (and matched controls) investigating their language development, including communication skills. She is interested in understanding how trauma, for example from neglect or abuse, typical amongst children in institutional care, affects development as well as in the role the ‘home’ environment plays in supporting development. Her latest publications include:

Touloumakos, A.K., Goozée R., Papadatou-Pastou, M., Barley, E., Haddad, M., & Tzotzoli, P. (2016).Online support system for students in higher education: Proof of concept study, Digital Health, 2 ,2055207616655012, doi: 10.1177/2055207616655012.​

Giotsa, A. & Touloumakos, A.K . (2016). They accept me, they accept me not: Psychometric properties of the Greek version of Child Parental Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire -Short Form, Journal of Family Issues, 37(9), 1226-1243. (first published online on July 30 th 2014), doi: 10.1177/0192513X14543851.

Giotsa, A., & Touloumakos, A.K. (2015) Parental Perceptions About the Behavior of Their Children (PECC): The psychometric traits of PECC Instrument, in M. Machado & F. Machado, (eds), New paths for acceptance: Opening awareness in interpersonal acceptance-rejection, Boca Raton, FL: Brown Walker Press.

Giotsa, A. & Touloumakos, A.K . (2014). Perceived Parental Acceptance and Psychological Adjustment: The moderating role of parental power and prestige among Greek pre-adolescents, Cross Cultural Research, 48 (3), 250-258, doi:10.1177/1069397114528300.

Christina Koutouveli

Christina Koutouveli is a teacher working at elementary education whilst reading for an MSc on Special Education. She is currently participating in an ongoing research on children aged 5 to 7 years old investigating their language development, and she is further involved in a meta-analysis on the development of handedness.

Alexia Barrable works in Initial Teacher Education at the University of Dundee. Her research interests centre around the meaningful application of research evidence to teacher education and teaching, and especially in relation to early childhood and outdoor education. Her latest publications include:

Barrable, A., & Arvanitis, A. (2019). Flourishing in the forest: Looking at Forest School through a self-determination theory lens. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 22 (1), 39-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-018-0018-5

Barrable, A. (2019). Refocusing environmental education in the early years: A brief introduction to a pedagogy for connection. Education Sciences, 9 (1), [61]. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9010061

Barrable, A., (2019). The case for nature connectedness as a distinct goal of early childhood education, International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 6 (2)

Barrable, A., & Lakin, L. (in press). Nature relatedness in student teachers, perceived competence and willingness to teach outdoors: An empirical study, Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2019.1609999

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Gritzal, M., & Barrable, A. (2018). The Learning Styles educational neuromyth: Lack of agreement between teachers’ judgments, self-assessment, and students’ intelligence. Frontiers in Education, 3 , 1-5. [105]. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00105

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Touloumakos, A.K., Koutouveli, C. et al. The learning styles neuromyth: when the same term means different things to different teachers. Eur J Psychol Educ 36 , 511–531 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00485-2

Download citation

Published : 03 July 2020

Issue Date : June 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00485-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Learning styles
• Teacher Education
• Continuous professional development
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Curriculum and Instruction Master's
• Reading Masters
• Reading Certificate
• TESOL Master's
• TESOL Certificate
• Educational Administration Master’s
• Educational Administration Certificate
• Autism Master's
• Autism Certificate
• Leadership in Special and Inclusive Education Certificate
• High Incidence Disabilities Master's
• Secondary Special Education and Transition Master's
• Secondary Special Education and Transition Certificate
• Virtual Learning Resources
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Video Gallery
• Financial Aid

Different Learning Styles—What Teachers Need To Know

The concept of “learning styles” has been overwhelmingly embraced by educators in the U.S. and worldwide. Studies show that an estimated 89% of teachers believe in matching instruction to a student’s preferred learning style (Newton & Salvi, 2020). That’s a problem—because research tells us that this approach doesn’t work to improve learning.

What Do We Mean by “Learning Styles”?

It’s true that people have fairly stable strengths and weaknesses in their cognitive abilities, such as processing language or visual-spatial stimuli. People can also have preferences in the way they receive information—Joan may prefer to read an article while Jay may rather listen to a lecture.

The “learning styles” theory makes a big leap, suggesting that students will learn better if they are taught in a manner that conforms to their preferences. More than 70 different systems have been developed that use student questionnaires/self-reports to categorize their supposed learning preferences.

VARK Learning Styles

One of the most popular learning styles inventories used in schools is the VARK system (Cuevas, 2015). Students answer 25 multiple-choice questions that range from how they like their teachers to teach (discussions and guest speakers, textbooks and handouts, field trips and labs, or charts and diagrams) to how they would give directions to a neighbor’s house (draw a map, write out directions, say them aloud, or walk with the person) (VARK Learn Limited, 2021). Based on their responses, the system classifies them as Visual, Auditory, Read-write, and/or Kinesthetic learners and recommends specific learning strategies.

If only it were that simple. While this brief survey may provide some insights for teachers, we must be wary of overestimating the value of the results. By placing students in categories that reflect “preferred learning styles,” we run the risk of oversimplifying the complex nature of teaching and learning to the detriment of our students.

What Does the Science Say?

Study after study has shown that matching instructional mode to a student’s supposedly identified “learning style” does not produce better learning outcomes. In fact, a student’s “learning style” may not even predict the way they prefer to be taught or the way they actually choose to study on their own (Newton & Salvi, 2020).

Simply put, students’ learning preferences as identified via questionnaires do not predict the singular, best way to teach them. A single student may learn best with one approach in one subject and a different one in another. The best approach for them may even vary day-to-day. Most likely, students are best served when a variety of strategies are employed in a lesson.

As appealing as a framework like VARK is—relatively easy to conceptualize and quick to assess—everyone engages in different modes of learning in various ways. The brain processes information in very complex and nuanced ways that can’t be so simply generalized.

Fads are common in education. Having been embraced for several decades, though, “learning styles” has moved beyond fad to what experts refer to as “neuromyth,” one of many “commonly accepted, erroneous beliefs based on misunderstandings of neuroscience that contribute to pseudoscientific practice within education (Ruhaak & Cook, 2018). In fact, the idea that “students learn best when teaching styles are matched to their learning styles” earned a spot in 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology (Lilienfeld, Lynn, & Beyerstein, 2009), alongside “Extrasensory perception is a well-established scientific phenomenon” and “Our handwriting reveals our personality traits.”

Unfortunately, the myth has become so prevalent that the majority of papers written about learning styles are based on the assumption that matching teaching style to learning style is desirable (Newton, 2015). It’s no surprise, then, that well-intentioned educators (and parents and caregivers) buy into the concept as well.

What Harm Does It Do?

When a student is pigeonholed as a particular “type” of learner, and their lessons are all prepared with that in mind, they could be missing out on other learning opportunities with a better chance of success.

Adapting instruction to individual students’ “learning styles” is no small task—and teachers who attempt to do so are clearly motivated to find the best way to help their students. They could put their time to better use, though.

Better Learning Style Approaches

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is an evidence-driven framework for improving and optimizing learning for all students. When a learning opportunity provides for 1) multiple means of engagement, 2) multiple means of representation, and 3) multiple means of action and expression, different styles of learning are accounted for at the outset, reducing the need to personalize every activity. Nonprofit CAST.org, where KU Special Education Professor Jamie Basham is Senior Director for Learning & Innovation, offers free UDL Guidelines, with detailed information on how to optimize learning for all your students.

Operating within a UDL framework, teachers should use Evidence-based Practices (EBPs)—specific teaching techniques and interventions that have sufficient published, peer-reviewed studies that demonstrate their effectiveness in addressing specific issues with particular populations of students. (We discussed EBPs for autism spectrum disorder in a previous blog.) In addition, the Council for Exceptional Children recommends a core set of High Leverage Practices –basic, foundational practices that every special education teacher should know and perform fluently.

Evidence-based Learning Style Approaches at KU Special Education

Faculty in the University of Kansas Department of Special Education are world-renowned for their research in UDL and evidence-based special education practices. Students can be assured that our online master’s degrees and graduate certificates focus on research-based teaching and assessment methods—just one of the reasons we’ve been rated the #1 Best Online Master’s Degree in Special Education by U.S. News & World Report for two years in a row. 1

Explore our special education programs and consider how earning an online master’s from a Top 10 Best Education School (among public universities) can help you achieve your goals

CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved March 4, 2021 from udlguidelines.cast.org.

Cuevas, J. (2015). Is learning styles-based instruction effective? A comprehensive analysis of recent research on learning styles. Theory & Research in Education. 13 (3), 308–333. doi.org/10.1177/1477878515606621

Lilienfeld, S., Lynn, J., Rucio, J., & Beyerstein, B. (2009) 50 great myths of popular psychology: Shattering widespread misconceptions about human behavior. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN: 978-1405131117

Newton, P. M. (2015). The learning styles myth is thriving in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 , 1908. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01908

Newton, P. M. & Salvi, A. (2020). How common is belief in the learning styles neuromyth, and does it matter? A pragmatic systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 5 (602451), 1-14. doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.602451

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., and Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9 , 105–119. doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x

Ruhaak, A. E., & Cook, B. G. (2018). The prevalence of educational neuromythings among pre-service special education teachers. Mind, Brain, and Education. 12 (3) 155-161. doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12181

1 Retrieved on May 13, 2021, from usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-education-schools/university-of-kansas-06075 2 Retrieved on May 13, 2021, from usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-education-schools/edu-rankings

Return to Blog

IMPORTANT DATES

Stay connected.

Link to twitter Link to facebook Link to youtube Link to instagram

The University of Kansas has engaged Everspring , a leading provider of education and technology services, to support select aspects of program delivery.

The University of Kansas prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, national origin, age, ancestry, disability, status as a veteran, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, retaliation, gender identity, gender expression and genetic information in the University's programs and activities. The following person has been designated to handle inquiries regarding the non-discrimination policies and is the University's Title IX Coordinator: the Executive Director of the Office of Institutional Opportunity and Access, [email protected] , 1246 W. Campus Road, Room 153A, Lawrence, KS, 66045, (785) 864-6414 , 711 TTY.

Create Your Course

The 7 main types of learning styles (and how to teach to them), share this article.

Understanding the 7 main types of learning styles and how to teach them will help both your students and your courses be more successful.

When it comes to learning something new, we all absorb information at different rates and understand it differently too. Some students get new concepts right away; others need to sit and ponder for some time before they can arrive at similar conclusions.

Why? The answer lies in the type of learning styles different students feel more comfortable with. In other words, we respond to information in different ways depending on how it is presented to us.

Clearly, different types of learning styles exist, and there are lots of debates in pedagogy about what they are and how to adapt to them.

For practical purposes, it’s recommended to ensure that your course or presentation covers the 7 main types of learning.

In this article, we’ll break down the 7 types of learning styles, and give practical tips for how you can improve your own teaching styles , whether it’s in higher education or an online course you plan to create on the side.

Skip ahead:

What are the 7 types of learning styles?

How to accommodate different types of learning styles online.

• How to help students understand their different types of learning styles

How to create an online course for all

In the academic literature, the most common model for the types of learning you can find is referred to as VARK.

VARK is an acronym that stands for Visual, Auditory, Reading & Writing, and Kinesthetic. While these learning methods are the most recognized, there are people that do not fit into these boxes and prefer to learn differently. So we’re adding three more learning types to our list, including Logical, Social, and Solitary.

Visual learners

Visual learners are individuals that learn more through images, diagrams, charts, graphs, presentations, and anything that illustrates ideas. These people often doodle and make all kinds of visual notes of their own as it helps them retain information better. 

When teaching visual learners, the goal isn’t just to incorporate images and infographics into your lesson. It’s about helping them visualize the relationships between different pieces of data or information as they learn. 

Gamified lessons are a great way to teach visual learners as they’re interactive and aesthetically appealing. You should also give handouts, create presentations, and search for useful infographics to support your lessons.

Since visual information can be pretty dense, give your students enough time to absorb all the new knowledge and make their own connections between visual clues.

Auditory/aural learners

The auditory style of learning is quite the opposite of the visual one. Auditory learners are people that absorb information better when it is presented in audio format (i.e. the lessons are spoken). This type of learner prefers to learn by listening and might not take any notes at all. They also ask questions often or repeat what they have just heard aloud to remember it better.

Aural learners are often not afraid of speaking up and are great at explaining themselves. When teaching auditory learners, keep in mind that they shouldn’t stay quiet for long periods of time. So plan a few activities where you can exchange ideas or ask questions. Watching videos or listening to audio during class will also help with retaining new information.

Reading and writing (or verbal) learners

Reading & Writing learners absorb information best when they use words, whether they’re reading or writing them. To verbal learners, written words are more powerful and granular than images or spoken words, so they’re excellent at writing essays, articles, books, etc. 

To support the way reading-writing students learn best, ensure they have time to take ample notes and allocate extra time for reading. This type of learner also does really well at remote learning, on their own schedule. Including reading materials and writing assignments in their homework should also yield good results.

Kinesthetic/tactile learners

Kinesthetic learners use different senses to absorb information. They prefer to learn by doing or experiencing what they’re being taught. These types of learners are tactile and need to live through experiences to truly understand something new. This makes it a bit challenging to prepare for them in a regular class setting. 

As you try to teach tactile learners, note that they can’t sit still for long and need more frequent breaks than others. You need to get them moving and come up with activities that reinforce the information that was just covered in class. Acting out different roles is great; games are excellent; even collaborative writing on a whiteboard should work fine. If applicable, you can also organize hands-on laboratory sessions, immersions, and workshops.

In general, try to bring every abstract idea into the real world to help kinesthetic learners succeed.

Logical/analytical learners 

As the name implies, logical learners rely on logic to process information and understand a particular subject. They search for causes and patterns to create a connection between different kinds of information. Many times, these connections are not obvious to people to learn differently, but they make perfect sense to logical learners. 

Logical learners generally do well with facts, statistics, sequential lists, and problem-solving tasks to mention a few. 

As a teacher, you can engage logical learners by asking open-ended or obscure questions that require them to apply their own interpretation. You should also use teaching material that helps them hone their problem-solving skills and encourages them to form conclusions based on facts and critical thinking. 

Social/interpersonal learners 

Social or interpersonal learners love socializing with others and working in groups so they learn best during lessons that require them to interact with their peers . Think study groups, peer discussions, and class quizzes. 

To effectively teach interpersonal learners, you’ll need to make teamwork a core part of your lessons. Encourage student interaction by asking questions and sharing stories. You can also incorporate group activities and role-playing into your lessons, and divide the students into study groups.  

Solitary/intrapersonal learners 

Solitary learning is the opposite of social learning. Solitary, or solo, learners prefer to study alone without interacting with other people. These learners are quite good at motivating themselves and doing individual work. In contrast, they generally don’t do well with teamwork or group discussions.

To help students like this, you should encourage activities that require individual work, such as journaling, which allows them to reflect on themselves and improve their skills. You should also acknowledge your students’ individual accomplishments and help them refine their problem-solving skills. 

Are there any unique intelligence types commonly shared by your students? Adapting to these different types of intelligence can help you can design a course best suited to help your students succeed.

Launch your online learning product for free

Use Thinkific to create, market, and sell online courses, communities, and memberships — all from a single platform.

How to help students understand their different types of learning styles 

Unless you’re teaching preschoolers, most students probably already realize the type of learning style that fits them best. But some students do get it wrong.

The key here is to observe every student carefully and plan your content for different learning styles right from the start.

Another idea is to implement as much individual learning as you can and then customize that learning for each student. So you can have visual auditory activities, riddles for logical learners, games for kinesthetic learners, reading activities, writing tasks, drawing challenges, and more.

When you’re creating your first course online, it’s important to dedicate enough time to planning out its structure. Don’t just think that a successful course consists of five uploaded videos.

Think about how you present the new knowledge. Where it makes sense to pause and give students the time to reflect. Where to include activities to review the new material. Adapting to the different learning types that people exhibit can help you design an online course best suited to help your students succeed.

That being said, here are some tips to help you tailor your course to each learning style, or at least create enough balance. 

Visual learners 

Since visual learners like to see or observe images, diagrams, demonstrations, etc., to understand a topic, here’s how you can create a course for them: 

• Include graphics, cartoons, or illustrations of concepts 
• Use flashcards to review course material 
• Use flow charts or maps to organize materials 
• Highlight and color code notes to organize materials 
• Use color-coded tables to compare and contrast elements 
• Use a whiteboard to explain important information
• Have students play around with different font styles and sizes to improve readability 

Auditory learners prefer to absorb information by listening to spoken words, so they do well when teachers give spoken instructions and lessons. Here’s how to cater to this learning type through your online course: 

• Converse with your students about the subject or topic 
• Ask your students questions after each lesson and have them answer you (through the spoken word)
• Have them record lectures and review them with you 
• Have articles, essays, and comprehension passages out to them
• As you teach, explain your methods, questions, and answers 
• Ask for oral summaries of the course material 
• If you teach math or any other math-related course, use a talking calculator 
• Create an audio file that your students can listen to
• Create a video of you teaching your lesson to your student
• Include a YouTube video or podcast episode for your students to listen to
• Organize a live Q & A session where students can talk to you and other learners to help them better understand the subject

Reading and writing (or verbal) learners 

This one is pretty straightforward. Verbal learners learn best when they read or write (or both), so here are some practical ways to include that in your online course:

• Have your students write summaries about the lesson 
• If you teach language or literature, assign them stories and essays that they’d have to read out loud to understand
• If your course is video-based, add transcripts to aid your students’ learning process
• Make lists of important parts of your lesson to help your students memorize them
• Provide downloadable notes and checklists that your students can review after they’ve finished each chapter of your course
• Encourage extra reading by including links to a post on your blog or another website in the course
• Use some type of body movement or rhythm, such as snapping your fingers, mouthing, or pacing, while reciting the material your students should learn

Since kinesthetic learners like to experience hands-on what they learn with their senses — holding, touching, hearing, and doing. So instead of churning out instructions and expecting to follow, do these instead: 

• Encourage them to experiment with textured paper, and different sizes of pencils, pens, and crayons to jot down information
• If you teach diction or language, give them words that they should incorporate into their daily conversations with other people
• Encourage students to dramatize or act out lesson concepts to understand them better 

Logical learners are great at recognizing patterns, analyzing information, and solving problems. So in your online course, you need to structure your lessons to help them hone these abilities. Here are some things you can do:

• Come up with tasks that require them to solve problems. This is easy if you teach math or a math-related course
• Create charts and graphs that your students need to interpret to fully grasp the lesson
• Ask open-ended questions that require critical thinking 
• Create a mystery for your students to solve with clues that require logical thinking or math
• Pose an issue/topic to your students and ask them to address it from multiple perspectives

Since social learners prefer to discuss or interact with others, you should set up your course to include group activities. Here’s how you can do that:

• Encourage them to discuss the course concept with their classmates
• Get your students involved in forum discussions
• Create a platform (via Slack, Discord, etc.) for group discussions
• Pair two or more social students to teach each other the course material
• If you’re offering a cohort-based course , you can encourage students to make their own presentations and explain them to the rest of the class

Solitary learners prefer to learn alone. So when designing your course, you need to take that into consideration and provide these learners a means to work by themselves. Here are some things you can try: 

• Encourage them to do assignments by themselves
• Break down big projects into smaller ones to help them manage time efficiently
• Give them activities that require them to do research on their own
• When they’re faced with problems regarding the topic, let them try to work around it on their own. But let them know that they are welcome to ask you for help if they need to
• Encourage them to speak up when you ask them questions as it builds their communication skills 
• Explore blended learning , if possible, by combining teacher-led classes with self-guided assignments and extra ideas that students can explore on their own.

Now that you’re ready to teach something to everyone, you might be wondering what you actually need to do to create your online courses. Well, start with a platform.

Thinkific is an intuitive and easy-to-use platform any instructor can use to create online courses that would resonate with all types of learning styles. Include videos, audio, presentations, quizzes, and assignments in your curriculum. Guide courses in real-time or pre-record information in advance. It’s your choice.

In addition, creating a course on Thinkific doesn’t require you to know any programming. You can use a professionally designed template and customize it with a drag-and-drop editor to get exactly the course you want in just a few hours. Try it yourself to see how easy it can be.

This blog was originally published in August 2017, it has since been updated in March 2023. 

Althea Storm is a B2B SaaS writer who specializes in creating data-driven content that drives traffic and increases conversions for businesses. She has worked with top companies like AdEspresso, HubSpot, Aura, and Thinkific. When she's not writing web content, she's curled up in a chair reading a crime thriller or solving a Rubik's cube.

• The 5 Most Effective Teaching Styles (Pros & Cons of Each)
• 7 Top Challenges with Online Learning For Students (and Solutions)
• 6 Reasons Why Creators Fail To Sell Their Online Courses
• The Advantages and Disadvantages of Learning in Online Classes in 2023
• 10 Steps To Creating A Wildly Successful Online Course

Related Articles

How to add voiceover to powerpoint (2022 update).

Are you looking to add audio, narration or voice-overs to your Powerpoint or Keynote slide presentations? We'll show you two ways to do it!

How To Improve Student Retention Through Personalized Transactional Emails

Learn how to improve student retention for your online course using transactional emails, through the essential elements in these examples.

What Is Blended Learning? Models & Best Practices

Blended learning is an approach to learning that integrates online education materials and place-based classroom methods. Here's how to approach!

Try Thinkific for yourself!

Accomplish your course creation and student success goals faster with thinkific..

Download this guide and start building your online program!

It is on its way to your inbox

Learning Styles

Learning Objectives

• I can describe my learning style
• I can understand the importance of knowing my learning style

How many times have you been told that you need to stop bouncing your leg in class and start paying attention to a lecture, however interesting it may be? Or maybe you’re reading a chapter for your homework and eventually, your eyes just glaze over because all the words blend. It’s happened to all of us, so what’s the cause of our brains not doing what we want them to do? Chances are that those activities didn’t match our learning styles. Everyone’s brain thinks differently, which makes some things easier to process and some things harder through different ways of teaching. It shows that learning is a personalized journey; no two individuals learn in exactly the same way. Our learning styles vary widely shaped by our personal experience.

 Before we dive in, it is important to address some conflicting ideas within the research on learning styles.  Bjork et al. (2008) explain that while incorporating every individual’s learning preferences all at once in a large setting is proven ineffective (for example in a classroom with 30 students), the learning preferences of an individual do impact their learning and is not disputable. Therefore, we will mainly be focusing on individual preference as opposed to any arguments that focus on using learning theories in regard to more than one person at a time. When learners are aware of and can choose what kind of materials or experiences they prefer, they are far more likely to stay engaged with the subject for longer and retain the material better. That said, there are four basic categories of learning styles that we’ll be talking about today; auditory, visual, reading/writing, and kinesthetic.

Auditory Learning Style

People with a preference for auditory learning are considered better learners if the material is presented in the form of a lecture, podcast, song, or any other possible auditory input. A possible optimal educational style for them would involve maximizing the auditory input in a target language, like watching television or listening to music.

Visual Learning Style

Where auditory learners might thrive with few visual embellishments – say in classroom dialogues, lectures, etc… -, visual learners tend to drift towards learning that incorporates, well, visual elements. They might prefer seeing graphs and tables with tangible numbers over just discussion. They might enjoy watching videos or movies about a certain subject because to them, having visual stimulus is integral to efficient learning.

Reading and Writing Learning Style

The third and fourth styles are generally grouped into the more ‘tactile’ category where students can actively engage and not just passively receive information. The reading and writing preferences are exactly what they sound like. Maybe you are an avid note-taker while reading your textbook, or you like to write the information out to help you learn.

Kinesthetic Learning Style

Lastly, the kinesthetic preference emphasizes the use of projects, non-traditional learning material, and active learner contribution. This could look like creating a posterboard, art project, food, or diagram to learn and display knowledge. In terms of active learning, something like an atomic model for a chemistry class could work very well so that kinesthetic learners can take it apart, put it together, and see hands-on how it functions. While categorization and labels can be helpful, it is important to remember that “Learning styles are not dichotomous” (Oxford, 2003). Ehrman (1996 as cited in Oxford, 2003) says, “Few if any people could be classified as having all or nothing in any of these categories”. Humankind is inherently diverse, and that extends to how our brains function. If there are eight billion people on earth, there are eight billion combinations of learning preferences. Labels can help us group similar people, but they are certainly not the end-all be-all.

Before we move on to the activity for this section, I have a question for you. Why is it important to know your learning preferences? If you already have an answer in mind, great, and if not, I encourage you to pause your reading and take a second to think. Now that you have an idea, I want to provide my own.

Knowing ourselves and how we function is the best way to optimize our learning. While we might not be given tasks in classes that utilize our best strategies, “When left to their own devices and if not encouraged by the teacher or forced by the lesson to use a certain set of strategies, students typically use learning strategies that reflect their basic learning styles” (Ehrman & Oxford, 1989; Oxford, 1996a, 1996b). If we can make the transition to actively create content that aligns with our learning strategies and our psychological makeup, our learning could be more efficient. In this activity, we will be discovering our learning styles. You probably already have an idea of what your learning style is, but this might reveal something that you might not have thought about. See you on the other side!

Learning Style Quiz Link

Before we continue, if you would like further information on what certain learning styles mean, please watch this video. This is optional viewing, but it is more in depth  information about learning styles.

If you think the quiz didn’t identify your correct learning style, you know yourself better than an online quiz. While this can help give you an idea of where your preferences might lie, you ultimately need to decide if it is true or not. Now that we know more about our learning styles, let’s brainstorm how to implement them into our independent language learning. This will serve as your guide for your future learning endeavors so that you can get the most out of your brain.

Planning out activities and learning methods for yourself can be extremely helpful. Maybe reading the textbook chapter while sitting on your bed doesn’t work, but walking around a park listening to the same chapter as an audiobook does. Hopefully, by taking this time to get to know yourself better, you can improve your future learning by choosing content or activities that are meaningful and engaging to you.

Language Learning Copyright © by Keli Yerian and Bibi Halima. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book

The Four Learning Styles and Their Examples Research Paper

Introduction.

Learning is one of the most interesting concepts in education because of its complex psychology. A person has learned if they exhibit a permanent change in behavior after acquiring some skills or knowledge through experience. The change in behavior entails psychological, mental, physical, and cognitive processes, seamlessly intertwined together. This paper discusses four major learning styles including associative learning, giving relevant examples for each style.

Associative learning takes place when the learner connects events occurring sequentially in their environment. This kind of learning is very vital to the different learning processes. The stimuli or events in associative learning can either be abstract concepts or concrete objects; depending on context, location, and time (Lind et al., 2019). An example of associative learning is when a person touches a hot stove for the first time and they feel pain. Consequently, the individual learns to avoid hot stoves by not putting their hands on them.

In classical conditioning, the learner changes his behavior by associating events occurring in a repeated manner. This process is common in our daily lives; an example being the experience of thunder and lightning during a storm (Spielman et al., 2014). Normally, a person will jump when they see lighting flashing across the sky followed by a big boom of thunder. They jump upon hearing the big boom since loud sounds cause such reflex reactions. Since the flashing of the lightning can, reliably, foretell the impending roaring of the thunder, people tend to associate the two, making them jump whenever they see the lightning flash.

In operant conditioning, a learner’s behavior is associated with a consequence which can either be reinforcement or a punishment. Pleasant consequences of a behavior encourage the behavior in the future while unpleasant consequences deter it (Spielman et al., 2014). An example of operant conditioning is attempting to train a dog to sit. Normally, one will command the dog to sit, giving it a treat whenever it obeys. After some time, the dog will start associating the act of sitting with receiving a treat. Conversely, if you punish the dog for exhibiting some behavior, the dog will be conditioned to avoid the behavior. For example, if it receives some shock while attempting to cross the boundary of an electric fence it will try to avoid the electric fences in the future.

Observational learning is another style of learning that occurs through indirect experiences. In this style of learning, the learner observes the experiences of another character and then imitates their behavior (Spielman et al., 2014). One of the examples of observational learning is where a son observes his father surfing. He is able to see the moves that cause failure, avoiding them while imitating those that bring him success. Through observation, the son can learn to surf faster than if he adopted a trial-and-error method of learning.

To sum it up, learning occurs through the association of different stimuli or events, leading to a change in behavior. While classical and operant learning entail direct experiences, in observational learning a learner’s behavior change is influenced by another party. Learners require a variety of learning experiences in order to gain skills and knowledge in a holistic manner. All these learning styles are essential to different facets of life and instructors should understand the processes in order to help learners achieve better learning outcomes.

Lind, J., Ghirlanda, S., & Enquist, M. (2019). Social Learning through associative processes: A computational theory . Royal Society Open Science , 6 (3). Web.

Spielman, R., Dumper, K., Perlmutter, M., Lacombe, A., Lovett, M., & Jenkins, W. (2014). Psychology . OpenStax.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 15). The Four Learning Styles and Their Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-four-learning-styles-and-their-examples/

"The Four Learning Styles and Their Examples." IvyPanda , 15 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/the-four-learning-styles-and-their-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'The Four Learning Styles and Their Examples'. 15 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "The Four Learning Styles and Their Examples." February 15, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-four-learning-styles-and-their-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Four Learning Styles and Their Examples." February 15, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-four-learning-styles-and-their-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Four Learning Styles and Their Examples." February 15, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-four-learning-styles-and-their-examples/.

• “A Sound of Thunder” and “Nethergrave”
• The War in Vietnam: Rolling Thunder Operation Design
• Thunder in the Sun - A Tale of Basque Gold-Rush Immigration
• Environmentalism in Ray Bradbury’s “A Sound of Thunder”
• Native Americans History in "Thunder Heart" Movie
• Blocking Paradigm Experiment: Predictive or Associative Learning
• Thunder Electronic Company's Financial Position
• Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning
• Phobia in Operant and Classical Conditioning
• Music Assignment: Associative Soundtrack
• Students' Motivations Toward Learning
• The Results of a Reading Intervention for the Full Class
• Learning Strategies for Critical Thinking
• Core Themes of Teaching Standards
• Clinical Supervision: The Learning Process

We use cookies on our website to support technical features that enhance your user experience, and to help us improve our website. By continuing to use this website, you accept our privacy policy .

• Student Login
• No-Cost Professional Certificates
• Call Us: 888-549-6755
• 888-559-6763
• Search site Search our site Search Now Close
• Request Info

Skip to Content (Press Enter)

4 Types of Learning Styles: How to Accommodate a Diverse Group of Students

By Callie Malvik on 08/17/2020

We all experience the world in unique ways, and with that comes variation in the ways we learn best. Understanding these different types of learning styles can drastically impact the way teachers handle their students, set up group projects and adapt individual learning. Without understanding and acknowledging these different ways of learning, teachers might end up with a handful of students lagging behind their classmates—in part because their unique learning style hasn’t been activated.

Part of your responsibility as an educator is to adjust your lessons to the unique group of students you are working with at any given time. The best teachers can cater to each student’s strengths, ensuring they are truly grasping the information.

So how do you meet the needs of different types of learners in your class? Join us as we outline the four types of learning styles and how teachers can practically apply this information in their classrooms.

Ways of learning: A closer look at 4 learning styles

Learning styles and preferences take on a variety of forms—and not all people fit neatly into one category. But generally speaking, these are the most common types of learners:

1. Visual learners

How to recognize visual learners in your class: Someone with a preference for visual learning is partial to seeing and observing things, including pictures, diagrams, written directions and more. This is also referred to as the “spatial” learning style. Students who learn through sight understand information better when it’s presented in a visual way. These are your doodling students, your list makers and your students who take notes.

How to cater to visual learners: The whiteboard or smartboard is your best friend when teaching these types of learners. Give students opportunities to draw pictures and diagrams on the board, or ask students to doodle examples based on the topic they’re learning. Teachers catering to visual learners should regularly make handouts and use presentations. Visual learners may also need more time to process material, as they observe the visual cues before them. So be sure to give students a little time and space to absorb the information.

2. Auditory learners

How to recognize auditory learners in your class: Auditory learners tend to learn better when the subject matter is reinforced by sound. These students would much rather listen to a lecture than read written notes, and they often use their own voices to reinforce new concepts and ideas. These types of learners prefer reading out loud to themselves. They aren’t afraid to speak up in class and are great at verbally explaining things. Additionally, they may be slower at reading and may often repeat things a teacher tells them.

How to cater to auditory learners: Since these students generally find it hard to stay quiet for long periods of time, get your auditory learners involved in the lecture by asking them to repeat new concepts back to you. Ask questions and let them answer. Invoke group discussions so your auditory and verbal processors can properly take in and understand the information they’re being presented with. Watching videos and using music or audiotapes are also helpful ways of learning for this group.

3. Kinesthetic learners

How to recognize kinesthetic learners in your class: Kinesthetic learners, sometimes called tactile learners, learn through experiencing or doing things. They like to get involved by acting out events or using their hands to touch and handle in order to understand concepts. These types of learners might struggle to sit still and often excel at sports or like to dance. They may need to take more frequent breaks when studying.

How to cater to kinesthetic learners: The best way teachers can help these students learn is by getting them moving. Instruct students to act out a certain scene from a book or a lesson you’re teaching. Also try encouraging these students by incorporating movement into lessons: pacing to help memorize, learning games that involve moving around the classroom or having students write on the whiteboard as part of an activity.

Once kinesthetic learners can physically sense what they’re studying, abstract ideas and difficult concepts become easier to understand.

4. Reading/writing learners

How to recognize reading/writing learners in your class: According to the VARK Modalities theory developed by Fleming and Mills in 1992, reading/writing learners prefer to learn through written words. While there is some overlap with visual learning, these types of learners are drawn to expression through writing, reading articles or books, writing in diaries, looking up words in the dictionary and searching the internet for just about everything.

How to cater to reading/writing learners: Of the four learning styles, this is probably the easiest to cater to since much of the traditional educational system tends to center on writing essays, doing research and reading books. Be mindful about allowing plenty of time for these students to absorb information through the written word, and give them opportunities to get their ideas out on paper as well.

Embrace all types of learning

Understanding these different learning styles doesn’t end in the classroom. By equipping students with tools in their early years, teachers are empowering them for their futures. Pinpointing how a child learns best can dramatically affect their ability to connect with the topics you’re teaching, as well as how they participate with the rest of the class.

Now that you have some tactics in your back pocket to accommodate different ways of learning, you may be curious about classroom management strategies. Learn more in our article, “ Proven Classroom Management Tips for Preschool Teachers . ”

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was originally published in 2018. It has since been updated to include information relevant to 2020.

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on Pinterest
• Share on LinkedIn

Request More Information

Talk with an admissions advisor today. Fill out the form to receive information about:

• Program Details and Applying for Classes
• Financial Aid and FAFSA (for those who qualify)
• Customized Support Services
• Detailed Program Plan

There are some errors in the form. Please correct the errors and submit again.

Please enter your first name.

Please enter your last name.

There is an error in email. Make sure your answer has:

• An "@" symbol
• A suffix such as ".com", ".edu", etc.

There is an error in phone number. Make sure your answer has:

• 10 digits with no dashes or spaces
• No country code (e.g. "1" for USA)

There is an error in ZIP code. Make sure your answer has only 5 digits.

Please choose a School of study.

Please choose a program.

Please choose a degree.

The program you have selected is not available in your ZIP code. Please select another program or contact an Admissions Advisor (877.530.9600) for help.

The program you have selected requires a nursing license. Please select another program or contact an Admissions Advisor (877.530.9600) for help.

Rasmussen University is not enrolling students in your state at this time.

By selecting "Submit," I authorize Rasmussen University to contact me by email, phone or text message at the number provided. There is no obligation to enroll. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

About the author

Callie Malvik

Callie is the Content Manager at Collegis Education, overseeing blog content on behalf of Rasmussen University. She is passionate about creating quality resources that empower others to improve their lives through education.

Posted in General Education

• early childhood education

Related Content

Brianna Flavin | 12.21.2023

Hope Rothenberg | 11.09.2023

Brianna Flavin | 05.11.2023

Patrick Flavin | 06.20.2022

This piece of ad content was created by Rasmussen University to support its educational programs. Rasmussen University may not prepare students for all positions featured within this content. Please visit www.rasmussen.edu/degrees for a list of programs offered. External links provided on rasmussen.edu are for reference only. Rasmussen University does not guarantee, approve, control, or specifically endorse the information or products available on websites linked to, and is not endorsed by website owners, authors and/or organizations referenced. Rasmussen University is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission, an institutional accreditation agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education.

• WordPress.org
• Documentation
• Learn WordPress
• Members Newsfeed

What are Learning Styles, and How Should Teachers Use Them?

• Learning Strategies, Tactics, and Methods

Introduction

Learning styles are an essential aspect of education that impact both student performance and teacher effectiveness. Teachers must recognize and understand these learning styles to create a conducive learning environment for their students. This article explores what learning styles are, their importance, and how teachers can use them to enhance student experiences.

What are Learning Styles?

Learning styles refer to the various ways individuals process and retain information. They describe a person’s preferred method of gathering, interpreting, organizing, and thinking about new information. Various models categorize learning styles differently, but some of the most common include:

1. Visual Learning: Visual learners process information effectively when presented in charts, diagrams, or other visual aids.

2. Auditory Learning: Auditory learners absorb information best when it is spoken or heard.

3. Kinesthetic Learning: Kinesthetic learners prefer hands-on experiences or physical activities to understand new concepts.

4. Reading/Writing Learning: Reading/writing learners effectively gather information through reading text or writing about the material they learn.

Why are Learning Styles Important?

Understanding different learning styles has several benefits for both students and teachers:

1. Enhances Students’ Understanding: A tailored approach to teaching can help clarify complex topics and improve comprehension by addressing each student’s preferred learning style.

2. Encourages Active Participation: Students feel more engaged when lessons match their preferred learning style, promoting participation in classroom discussions and activities.

3. Boosts Confidence: When students experience success through tailored teaching methods, their confidence and motivation increase.

4. Personalized Education Experience: Customizing instruction according to learning styles ensures that no student is left behind due to a one-size-fits-all approach.

How Should Teachers Use Learning Styles?

Teachers can implement various strategies based on understanding their students’ learning styles:

1. Offer Diverse Instructional Methods: Teachers should incorporate visual aids, auditory explanations, hands-on activities, and reading/writing assignments in their lessons to appeal to a range of preferences.

2. Cater to Multiple Learning Styles Simultaneously: Presenting material in diverse formats at once can engage multiple learning styles and foster a deeper understanding.

3. Foster Collaborative Learning: Teachers can encourage students with different learning styles to work together on projects or assignments, promoting active engagement and shared understanding.

4. Adapt Assessments: Varying assessment formats, such as oral presentations, written essays, or practical tasks, enables students to perform at their best based on their preferences.

5. Maintain Flexibility: Educators must be willing to adjust teaching methods based on student feedback and ongoing assessments of class progress.

Teachers play a vital role in facilitating the growth of every student by recognizing and adapting their teaching style to meet each student’s unique needs. Understanding learning styles and employing strategies that cater to them can have a profound impact on student success, resulting in a more inclusive, engaging, and effective classroom experience for all involved.

Related Articles

Introduction: In today's fast-paced, technology-driven world, educators and school administrators are faced…

Introduction: In the world of education, teachers encounter students with various backgrounds,…

Introduction Halloween is a much-awaited festival that brings excitement and fun to…

Pedagogue is a social media network where educators can learn and grow. It's a safe space where they can share advice, strategies, tools, hacks, resources, etc., and work together to improve their teaching skills and the academic performance of the students in their charge.

If you want to collaborate with educators from around the globe, facilitate remote learning, etc., sign up for a free account today and start making connections.

Pedagogue is Free Now, and Free Forever!

• New? Start Here
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service
• Registration

Don't you have an account? Register Now! it's really simple and you can start enjoying all the benefits!

We just sent you an Email. Please Open it up to activate your account.

I allow this website to collect and store submitted data.

Laerning Styles Essay

• December 7, 2022

Personal Learning Style

Learning Styles Essay: Introduction

Learning styles are essential variables in the learning process, and learner who knows their learning style are more successful than others because those individuals are already familiar with their learning styles and organizing their learning process accordingly. In this assignment, a summary of my learning style, according to the VARK questionnaire, has been presented. The paper also includes my preferred learning style, individual learning styles, and understanding of different learning styles, along with their interrelation and possible impacts. After all, rather than counting merely on a single learning style, a combination of different styles may lead to success in the long run.

The VARK Questionnaire

The Vark questionnaire is an essential website that provides a chance for individuals to learn their learning styles. According to my test result of the Vark questioner: “People with your preference like different formats, graphs, diagrams, maps, interesting layouts, space, listening, discussing, talking, questioning, notes, handouts, print, text, practical exercises, experiences, examples, case studies, trial and error, things that are real” (“Vark Learning,” 2020, para. 7). Moreover, my scores are the same in every category, and my learning style includes visual, aural, read/write, and kinesthetic, so one can infer that I adapt to almost all learning strategies that are proved by educators.

According to my test result, I prefer every learning style the same, but to support my learning process, I prefer to read examples, articles, and other sources on the topic. Also, I can infer that I am learning better when educator uses graphics, visual examples, and listening to the educator motives my learning process. Furthermore, the Vark questionnaire results have shown that I can be more successful if I try to improve other learning styles, such as aural and kinesthetic. The aural learning style in education demands to take summarized notes in order to create a better learning process, but I am not particularly eager to take summarized notes because I prefer taking long notes and summarized them in my mind. Also listening to educator during the lesson make my learning process more memorable than taking notes while I am listening to the educator. More specifically, seeing charts, graphics, visual examples during the lessons makes my learning process more effective than other times.

Learning Styles & Strategies

One can infer that learning styles affect the learning process during the education, and it is an essential variable to perform educational activities because every learning style demands different variable, and when educator plans educational activities, these learning styles help the learning process. Also, most of the time, educational activities can benefit the learner, but when learners perform an educational activity that is inadequate to its learning style, the educational activity can harm its learning process because learners should be motivated with such educational activities. In other words, inadequate educational activities might give those learners hard times during the activity, and the learner becomes unmotivated when they experience hard times during the educational activity. On the other hand, if an educator knows the learner's learning styles, this can be prevented because educators can plan educational activities according to the learner's learning styles, and this point of view can motivate learners to perform in the educational activities in the degree that they are studying.

Moreover, the importance of knowing learner's learning styles can lead to positive or negative outcomes in education but knowing the learner's learning styles can be ineffective if the educator does not know how to provide adequate activities to the learner, and on the contrary circumstances, learners can motive their learning process, and they may come up with good outcomes (Jackie, 2020).

Health Promotion Teaching

In health promotion teaching, it is critical to learn participants learning styles for desired outcomes. Also, in the patient teaching education, there are several strategies for a more effective learning process, and the most important perspective in these strategies is that educators should learn their patient's or family member's education level in order to reach the desired outcome. More specifically, learner's educations level affects their learning process and motivation in the learning process (Jackie, 2020). Moreover, when an educator learns their learning styles or education level, it is more likely to provide them a better learning process, and before teaching, education level is an important variable. In other words, assessing learning needs, or the gap between what patients know and need to learn is a priority.

“Asking about patients' or caregivers' level of formal education is important but may not in and of itself describe their capacity to learn new information at the point the clinician encounters them” (“Patient Education,” 2020, para. 11). One can infer that high educated learners are more close to the learning process, and other learners who have lower degrees are more open, and more motivated in the learning process. Also, the educator's teaching strategies are an important variable for learners. More specifically, educators should provide related materials to the learner in the learning process, such as using visuals, models, dolls, and realistic medical equipment in teaching (Jackie, 2020). Also, the learning environment is a critical variable because noise makes communication harder.

Furthermore, for achieving desired outcomes, educators should provide learners to use different strategies according to their learning styles, motivations in order to reach the desired outcome in the learning process. More specifically, for patient learners, it can be difficult to stay motivated in the learning process, but when educator uses all these strategies with adequate activities, learning styles will affect learners to positive behavioral change.

Learning Styles Essay: Conclusion

In conclusion, one can readily infer that learning styles are critical variables in the learning process, and learners who know their learning styles are more successful than others because those individuals are already familiar with their learning styles and organizing their learning process accordingly. In this assignment, a summary of my learning style, according to the VARK questionnaire, has been presented. The paper also presented my preferred learning style, individual learning styles, and understanding of different learning styles, along with their interrelation and possible impacts. After all, rather than counting merely on a single learning style, a combination of different styles may lead to success in the long run.

Jackie A. Smith is a professor (clinical) and Helen Zsohar is a professor emerita (clinical) at the University of Utah College of Nursing in Salt Lake City. (n.d.). Patient-education tips for new nurses : Nursing2020.

Patient Education in Home Care: Strategies for Success. (n.d.). Nursing Center

VARK Learning Style Questionnaire. (2020). Retrieved June 20, 2020, from https://vark-learn.com

Recently on Tamara Blog

Essay on Animal Farm by Orwell – Free Essay Samples

“Animal Farm” by George Orwell is a literary masterpiece that tells the story of a group of farm animals who rebel against their human farmer and establish a socialist community based on the principles of equality and mutual respect (Orwell, 1945). However, over time, the pigs who lead the revolution gradually become corrupted by power and begin to oppress and exploit the other animals, ultimately turning the farm into a totalitarian state.

Essay on Cyberbullying – Free Essay Samples

Bullying is an aggressive behavior that is intentional and repeated, aimed at causing harm or discomfort to a person, and often takes place in social environments such as schools, workplaces, and online platforms. Cyberbullying is a relatively new form of bullying that has emerged with the widespread use of technology and the internet. Cyberbullying refers to bullying behaviors that occur online or through electronic means, such as social media, text messages, and emails.

Essay on Nature vs. Nurture – Free Essay Samples

The debate over nature versus nurture has been a longstanding topic of interest among psychologists and other scholars. The two concepts, nature and nurture, are frequently used to explain human development and behavior.

Lord of the Flies Essay – Free Essay Samples

Veterans have played a critical role in the history of the United States, serving their country in times of war and peace. Despite their sacrifices, many veterans face significant challenges, including physical and mental health issues, homelessness, and unemployment.

Why Veterans Are Important – Free Essay Samples

American dream essay – free essay samples.

The American Dream has been a central concept in American culture for decades, representing the idea that anyone, regardless of their background, can achieve success and prosperity through hard work and determination. The concept of the American Dream is rooted in the country’s history and has been promoted in various ways, from the founding fathers’ beliefs to the post-World War II era.

• Open access
• Published: 26 April 2024

Relationship between learning styles and clinical competency in nursing students

• Seyed Kazem Mousavi 1 , 2 ,
• Ali Javadzadeh 3 ,
• Hanieh Hasankhani 3 &
• Zahra Alijani Parizad 3  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  469 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

141 Accesses

Metrics details

The acquisition of clinical competence is considered the ultimate goal of nursing education programs. This study explored the relationship between learning styles and clinical competency in undergraduate nursing students.

A descriptive-correlational study was conducted in 2023 with 276 nursing students from the second to sixth semesters at Abhar School of Nursing, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Data were collected using demographic questionnaires, Kolb’s learning styles, and Meretoja’s clinical competence assessments completed online by participants. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 16, employing descriptive statistics and inferential tests (independent T-test, ANOVA, Pearson correlation) at a significance level 0.05.

The predominant learning styles among nursing students were divergent (31.2%), and the least common was convergent (18.4%). The overall clinical competency score was 77.25 ± 12.65. Also, there was a significant relationship between learning styles and clinical competency, so the clinical competency of students with accommodative and converging learning styles was higher. ( P  < 0.05).

The results of this study showed the association between learning styles and clinical competence in nursing students. It is recommended that educational programs identify talented students and provide workshops tailored to strengthen various learning styles associated with enhanced clinical competence.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Clinical competency is a multifaceted and nuanced concept that has been extensively explored and examined from various perspectives in recent years [ 1 ]. Its significance is underscored by the World Health Organization (WHO), which has identified the assessment and enhancement of nurses’ competencies as fundamental principles to uphold the quality of care. WHO defines nurses as competent when they can fulfill their professional responsibilities at the appropriate level, grade, and standard [ 2 ]. Factors such as evolving healthcare systems, the imperative for safe and cost-effective services, heightened community awareness of health issues, escalating expectations for quality care, and the demand for skilled healthcare professionals have elevated the importance of clinical competence in nursing and related fields [ 3 ]. Clinical competency is considered the ultimate objective and benchmark of nursing education effectiveness [ 4 ]. Notably, clinical education constitutes a pivotal component of nursing training, with over half of nursing programs dedicated to practical training [ 5 ]. A nursing student’s ability to become a proficient nurse at the bedside hinges on acquiring essential skills during their academic journey and attaining requisite qualifications [ 6 ]. Scholars argue that continual efforts to enhance educational quality are essential for upholding nursing care standards and improving clinical competence [ 7 , 8 ]. Understanding how learners acquire knowledge is crucial for enhancing educational quality, with learning styles playing a pivotal role in this process [ 9 ].

Learning refers to the relatively enduring behavioral changes from experiences [ 10 ]. Learning styles, a concept widely embraced by educational theorists in recent decades, pertain to individuals’ distinct approaches to processing information and acquiring knowledge [ 11 ]. These styles encompass cognitive and psychosocial traits that are relatively stable indicators of learners’ engagement with and response to their learning environments [ 12 ]. Among the myriad theories on learning styles, Kolb’s learning theory is particularly influential [ 13 ]. According to Kolb, learning can be categorized into four primary modes: concrete experience, abstract conceptualization, reflective observation, and active experimentation, yielding four learning styles—converging, diverging, assimilating, and accommodating [ 14 ].

People with a converging learning style excel at problem-solving, decision-making, and practical application by engaging in abstract conceptualization and active experimentation [ 15 ]. Diverging learners thrive on experiencing and closely observing situations, possessing a unique ability to view scenarios from multiple perspectives and synthesize information into a cohesive whole [ 16 ]. The assimilating learning style is characterized by a preference for deep thinking and thorough examination, with individual’s adept at organizing information and employing abstract concepts to comprehend complex situations [ 13 ]. Accommodating learners learn best through hands-on experiences and activities, demonstrating proficiency in working with tangible objects and gaining new insights through practical engagement [ 10 ]. Learning styles are essential in nursing education because the primary mission of nursing education programs is to train nurses who have the necessary knowledge, attitude, and skills to maintain and improve the health of society members, and in other words, have sufficient competence in providing their job duties [ 17 ].

So far, separate studies have been conducted on nursing students’ learning styles and clinical competency [ 4 , 8 , 13 , 17 ]. However, the relationship between these two concepts has received less attention from researchers. The first step in ensuring students’ academic success is to determine their learning style [ 11 ]. Professors’ awareness of the student’s learning styles and the relationship between these styles and the level of clinical competency provide a favorable opportunity to identify the styles with higher clinical competency and encourage students to use them as much as possible. Considering this importance, the researchers decided to design and implement the present study to investigate the relationship between learning styles and clinical competency in nursing students.

Materials and methods

Study design and sampling.

This study was a descriptive-correlational study conducted in 2023, investigating the relationship between learning styles and the clinical competency of undergraduate nursing students. The research involved all second to sixth-semester undergraduate nursing students from the Abhar School of Nursing affiliated with Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Sampling was carried out as a census, with 276 students selected to participate in the study. The inclusion criteria included willingness to participate in the study, full-time employment in nursing, no prior clinical work experience, and no reported psychiatric diseases or medication use. Incomplete questionnaire completion was set as an exclusion criterion.

Instruments

The data collection tools included demographic questionnaires, Kolb’s learning styles questionnaire, and a modified Meretoja nursing clinical competency questionnaire. The demographic questionnaire gathered age, gender, marital status, semester, Grade Point Average (GPA), and interest in nursing.

The data collection tools included demographic questionnaires, Kolb’s learning styles questionnaire, and a modified Meretoja nursing clinical competency questionnaire. The demographic questionnaire gathered information such as age, gender, marital status, semester, Grade Point Average (GPA), and interest in nursing.

Kolb’s III learning styles questionnaire comprised 12 questions with four options each, requiring the student to select the option most similar to them. Each option represented one of the four main learning methods: concrete experience (CE), reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptualization (AC), and active experimentation (AE). Scores for the four learning styles were obtained from the total questions across the sections. By subtracting scores, two dimensions (AC - CE) and (AE - RO) were derived, determining the student’s learning styles as converging, diverging, accommodating, or assimilating [ 18 ]. This questionnaire has been used in various studies over the past 30 years, demonstrating validity and reliability. In Iran, Ghahrani et al. used the internal consistency method to determine the reliability of the questionnaire. They obtained Cronbach’s alpha of 71% in concrete experience, 68% in reflective observation, 71% in abstract conceptualization, and 71% in active experimentation [ 19 ]. Also, In the present study, the reliability value of this questionnaire was determined using Cronbach’s alpha method of 0.94.

Meretoja’s revised nursing clinical competency questionnaire contained 47 items across 5 areas of clinical competency: assisting patients (7 skills), teaching and guidance (12 skills), diagnostic measures (8 skills), therapeutic measures (5 skills), and occupational responsibilities (15 skills). Skills were rated on a four-point Likert scale, assessing the degree of skill utilization [ 20 ]. This questionnaire was psychometrically evaluated in Iran by Bahreini et al., and its validity was qualitatively determined at the optimal level, and its reliability was determined between 70 and 85%. Also, in this study, the reliability value of this questionnaire was determined using Cronbach’s alpha method of 0.91 [ 21 ].

Data collection and statistical analysis

Following ethical approval and research permission, questionnaires, consent forms, and contact information for the researchers were provided to students online through the Porsline system ( www.porsline.ir ) for completion. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 16 software, employing descriptive (frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation) and inferential (independent T-test, ANOVA, Pearson correlation) statistics at a significance level of 0.05.

Out of 276 participants, 10 students were excluded due to incomplete questionnaire responses, leaving 266 participants for analysis. The average age of students was 22.33, with 63.4% being female. Most participants were single (79.2%), and 46.2% had a GPA between 16 and 18. Also, 80.7% of students declared that they are interested in nursing. Then, the results of the questionnaires on learning styles and clinical competency were examined. Based on this, the findings showed that divergent (31.2%) and convergent (18.4%) styles were the study participants’ most and least-used learning styles, respectively. Also, the overall students’ clinical competence score was 77.25 ± 12.65 (Table  1 ).

The relationship between the participants’ learning styles and clinical competency was examined in the next step. Initially, the study data underwent a normality assessment. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test results indicated that parametric statistical tests were applicable ( p  > 0.05). Subsequently, an ANOVA test was conducted to explore the relationship between learning styles and clinical competency, revealing a significant association between learning style and clinical competency with moderate effect size ( p  < 0.05) (Table  2 ).

The correlation between demographic variables, learning styles, and student clinical competency was investigated in the final phase of analyzing the findings. Parametric independent t-tests, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and ANOVA were employed for this analysis. The results indicated that none of the learning styles exhibited a statistically significant relationship with the demographic characteristics of the participants ( p  > 0.05). However, a significant correlation was observed between participants’ demographic variables, such as age, academic semester, GPA, and interest in nursing, and their clinical competencies ( p  < 0.05) (Table  3 ).

This study explored the relationship between learning styles and clinical competency in undergraduate nursing students. The research initially focused on examining the variables and subsequently explored their interrelation. According to this, the most prevalent learning style among nursing students was divergent. This finding aligns with the outcomes of various domestic studies like Mehni et al. [ 22 ] and Shirazi et al. [ 16 ], as well as numerous international studies such as those by Campos et al. in Brazil and the United States [ 23 ], Nosheen in Pakistan [ 24 ], Madu et al. in Nigeria [ 25 ], and AbuAssi et al. in Saudi Arabia [ 26 ]. It should be said that the dominant abilities of people with divergent styles are concrete experience and reflective observation. They see the situation from multiple angles, emphasize brainstorming and generating ideas, have a strong imagination, are more sensitive to values, respect the feelings of others, and listen with an open mind and without bias [ 5 ]. Therefore, these people have high cultural interests and are more inclined towards humanities fields such as sociology, psychology, counseling, and nursing.

Upon reviewing studies in this field, it is concluded that findings often vary. They can be influenced by factors including individual student traits, educators’ teaching styles, learning environments, and tasks [ 12 ]. Also, this study noted no significant association between learning styles and participants’ demographic characteristics, consistent with similar research in the field [ 22 , 23 ]. In this regard, Dantas et al. emphasized that learning styles predominantly reflect individuals’ traits and are minimally impacted by demographic variables [ 12 ].

Furthermore, the clinical competency level of nursing students was reported to be at an average level, consistent with findings from studies conducted in Iran [ 6 , 27 , 28 ] and other countries [ 29 , 30 , 31 ]. Some studies, however, have yielded differing results compared to the present study. For instance, Ghafari et al. [ 1 ], Katebi et al. [ 32 ], and Fung et al. [ 33 ] found that nursing students participating in their studies exhibited a higher level of clinical competency. Notably, participants in all three mentioned studies were in their final year of study undergoing the arena course. Hence, the emphasis on passing diverse training units and gaining more clinical experiences could justify the high clinical competency score achieved. Also, In the present study, the relationship between academic semesters and students’ clinical competency was significant, which confirms the above argument. Conversely, certain studies have reported a lower level of clinical competency among nursing students. For example, Getie et al. found that only one-third of nursing students demonstrated acceptable clinical competency [ 34 ]. These discrepancies in findings can stem from the questionnaire and the data collection method used. Notably, Getie et al. evaluated students’ clinical competency through assessments by cooperating nurses rather than self-assessment. Additionally, adjusting the questionnaire averages to reflect higher clinical competence could impact the reported competency levels. Various factors, such as individual, environmental, organizational, and educational characteristics, influence the acquisition of clinical competency in nursing students [ 2 ]. Hence, diverse study outcomes exist in this field. Also, besides academic semesters, relationships were observed between age, GPA, interest in the field, and nursing students’ clinical competency. These results align with the findings of many studies in this area [ 27 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33 ]. Older students are often in their final semesters, potentially showcasing higher clinical competency due to their exposure to clinical environments. Madjid et al. highlighted in their study that good grades obtained by learners in any field indicate their interest in the subject. This aspect holds particular significance in nursing—a complex and demanding profession where success hinges on a genuine interest and academic excellence [ 35 ].

Also, the study revealed a significant relationship between nursing students’ learning styles and clinical competency. According to this, students employing accommodating and converging learning styles reported heightened levels of clinical competency. In their study, Ebrahimi Fakhar et al. noted that medical students utilizing reflective observation and active experimentation learning methods exhibited enhanced clinical competency upon course completion. As these attributes align with accommodative and convergent learning style characteristics, the present study’s results are consistent with these findings [ 36 ]. Moon et al. found that nursing students with converging and accommodating styles reported increased competence in clinical practices [ 37 ]. Similarly, Lundell Rudberg et al. revealed that nursing students with these learning styles demonstrated greater professional responsibility, a key aspect of clinical competence. This correlation indirectly supports the present study’s outcomes [ 38 ]. Generally, it can be said that people with convergent and accommodating learning styles typically gravitate toward practical learning. They are inclined towards hands-on activities, deriving their learning mainly through experience and active participation [ 12 , 15 ]. Therefore, they are expected to engage more in clinical settings, fostering heightened clinical competency. Furthermore, the study’s latest findings indicated that students with an assimilating learning style exhibited lower levels of clinical competency, aligning with Moon et al.‘s study [ 37 ]. Similarly, Figueiredo et al. explored nurses’ learning styles based on Kolb’s theory in qualitative research, noting that nurses with assimilating learning styles are inclined towards abstract and subjective concepts over practical content and may have less enthusiasm for immersive clinical environments [ 39 ].

Limitations

One limitation of this study was the potential for inaccuracies in questionnaire completion due to the electronic data collection method and the extensive number of questions. To address this concern, participants were provided with researchers’ contact details for clarifications during data collection. Another limitation was the reliance on self-report tools and the omission of considering individuals’ personality traits in measuring the research variables, factors beyond researchers’ direct control.

The study’s findings underscore the relationship between learning styles and clinical competency in undergraduate nursing students. Therefore, considering the high importance of acquiring clinical competency in these students, it is recommended that educational administrators identify students prone to declining clinical competency based on their learning styles and organize workshops to enhance styles associated with superior clinical competency. Also, Given the complexity of learning styles and clinical competency as constructs, future studies may benefit from exploring additional theories and tools to delve deeper into these concepts, employing qualitative or mixed-method approaches for comprehensive analysis.

Data availability

Data is provided within the manuscript or supplementary information files.

Ghafari S, Atashi V, Taleghani F, Irajpour A, Sabohi F, Yazdannik A. Comparison the Effect of two methods of internship and apprenticeship in the field on clinical competence of nursing students. RME. 2022;14(1):64–72.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ghanbari-Afra L, Sharifi K. Clinical competence and its related factors in Iranian nurses: a systematic review. Qom Univ Med Sci J. 2022;16(1):2–17.

Najafi B, Nakhaee M, Vagharseyyedin SA. Clinical competence of nurses: a systematic review study. Q J Nurs Manage. 2022;11(1):1–9.

Google Scholar  

Taylor I, Bing-Jonsson PC, Finnbakk E, et al. Development of clinical competence– a longitudinal survey of nurse practitioner students. BMC Nurs. 2021;20(1):1–15.

Shoja M, Arsalani N, Rasouli P, Babanataj R, Shirozhan S, Fallahi-Khoshknab M. Challenges of clinical education for Iranian undergraduate nursing students: a review of the literature. 2022; 2(2):46–60.

Khashei s, Ziaeirad M. The relationship between moral intelligence and clinical competence of nursing students in the internship course. Nurs Midwifery J. 2021;19(6):437–48.

Rahmah NM, Hariyati TS, Sahar J. Nurses’ efforts to maintain competence: a qualitative study. J Public Health Res. 2021;11(2):2736.

Matlhaba KL, Nkoane NL. Understanding the learning needs to enhance clinical competence of new professional nurses in public hospitals of South Africa: a qualitative study. Belitung Nurs J. 2022;8(5):414–21.

Den Hertog R, Boshuizen HPA. Learning Professional Knowledge: bachelor nursing students’ experiences in Learning and Knowledge Quality outcomes in a competence-based curriculum. Vocations Learn. 2022;15(1):21–47.

Cheng YC, Huang LC, Yang CH, Chang HC. Experiential Learning Program to strengthen self-reflection and critical thinking in Freshmen nursing students during COVID-19: a quasi-experimental study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(15):1–8.

Dantas LA, Cunha A. An integrative debate on learning styles and the learning process. Social Sci Humanit Open. 2020;2(1):1–5.

Al-Roomy MA. The relationship among students’ learning styles, Health sciences Colleges, and Grade Point Average (GPA). Adv Med Educ Pract. 2023;14(1):203–13.

Helou N, Aoudé J, Sobral G. Undergraduate students’ perceptions of learning nursing theories: a descriptive qualitative approach. Nurse Educ Pract. 2022;61(1):103325.

Figueiredo LDF, Silva NC, Prado ML. Primary care nurses’ learning styles in the light of David Kolb. Rev Bras Enferm. 2022;75(1):1–7.

Khozaei SA, Zare NV, Moneghi HK, Sadeghi T, Mahdizadeh Taraghdar M. Effects of quantum-learning and conventional teaching methods on learning achievement, motivation to learn, and retention among nursing students during critical care nursing education. Smart Learn Environ. 2022;18(9):1–11.

Shirazi F, Heidari S. The relationship between critical thinking skills and learning styles and academic achievement of nursing students. J Nurs Res. 2019;27(4):e38.

Lundell Rudberg S, Lachmann H, Sormunen T, et al. The impact of learning styles on attitudes to interprofessional learning among nursing students: a longitudinal mixed methods study. BMC Nurs. 2023;68(22):1–9.

Kolb A, Kolb D. The Kolb Learning Style Inventory—Version 3.1 2005 Technical Specifi cations 2005.

Ghahremani Z, Amini K, Roohani M, Aghvamy MA. The Relationship between Preferred Learning styles and Academic Achievement of Zanjan Nursing and midwifery students. J Med Educ Dev. 2013;6(12):51–61.

Meretoja R, Isoaho H, Leino-Kilpi H. Nurse competence scale: development and psychometric testing. J Adv Nurs. 2004;47(2):124–33.

Bahreini M, Moatary M, Akaberian S, Mirzaie K. Determining nurses’ clinical competence in hospitals of Bushehr University of Medical Sciences by self assessment method. Iran South Med J. 2008;11(1):69–75.

Mehni S, Chahartangi F, Tahergorabi M, Dastyar N, Mehralizadeh A, Amirmijani A. Relationship between Kolb’s Learning styles and Readiness for E-learning: a crosssectional study in the Covid-19 pandemic. Interdiscip J Virtual Learn Med Sci. 2023;14(2):99–10.

Campos DG, Alvarenga MRM, Morais SCRV, Gonçalves N, Silva TBC, Jarvill M, Oliveira Kumakura ARS. A multi-centre study of learning styles of new nursing students. J Clin Nurs. 2022;31(1–2).

Nosheen N, Hussain M. The Association between learning style, learning strategies with academic performance among nursing students. J Health Med Nurs. 2020;72:62–7.

Madu OT, Ogbonnaya NP, Chikeme PC, Omotola NJ. A study to assess the learning style preference of undergraduate nursing students in Southeast, Nigeria. Asian J Nurs Educ Res. 2019;9:177–84.

AbuAssi N, Alkorashy H. Relationship between learning style and readiness for self-directed learning among nursing students at king Saud university, Saudi Arabia. Int J Adv Nurs Stud. 2016;5:109–16.

Tohidi S, KarimiMoonaghi H, Shayan A, Ahmadinia H. The Effect of Self-learning Module on nursing students’ clinical competency: a pilot study. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2019;24(2):91–5.

Motefakker S, Shirinabadi Farahani A, Nourian M, Nasiri M, Heydari F. The impact of the evaluations made by Mini-CEX on the clinical competency of nursing students. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):1–8.

Lee KC, Ho CH, Yu CC, Chao YF. The development of a six-station OSCE for evaluating the clinical competency of the student nurses before graduation: a validity and reliability analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;84:104247.

Yu M, Tong H, Li S, Wu XV, Hong J, Wang W. Clinical competence and its association with self-efficacy and clinical learning environments among Chinese undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ Pract. 2021;53:103055.

Green G, Ofri L, Tesler R. The role of fundamental nursing practices Simulation on Students’ competencies and learning satisfaction: repeated measured design. Healthc (Basel). 2022;10(5):1–8.

Katebi MS, Arab Ahmadi A, Jahani H, Mohalli F, Rahimi M, Jafari F. The effect of portfolio training and clinical evaluation method on the clinical competence of nursing students. J Nurs Midwifery Sci. 2020;7:233–40.

Fung JTC, Zhang W, Yeung MN, Pang MTH, Lam VSF, Chan BKY, Wong JY. Evaluation of students’ perceived clinical competence and learning needs following an online virtual simulation education programme with debriefing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurs Open. 2021;8(6):3045–54.

Getie A, Tsige Y, Birhanie E, Tlaye KG, Demis A. Clinical practice competencies and associated factors among graduating nursing students attending at universities in Northern Ethiopia: institution-based cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2021;11(4):e044119.

Madjid FT, Villacorte LM, Cajigal JV, Rosario-Hussein CD, Saguban RB, Gudoy N, Madjid ZNT. Factors influencing the clinical competency among nursing students: a cross-sectional study. Hail J Health Sci. 2023;5(1):7–12.

Ebrahimi Fakhar A, Adhami Moghadam F, Merati F, Sahebalzamani M. The relationship of learning styles with Basic sciences and pre-internships Comprehensive Examination scores and students’ results of the clinical competency test at the end of the General practitioner course. Educational Dev JundiShapur. 2019;10(3):219–29.

Moon MY. Relationship between clinical competency and Kolb’s learning style for clinical practice education in nursing students. Int J Adv Nurs Educ Res. 2019;4(2):1–6.

Lundell Rudberg S, Lachmann H, Sormunen T, Scheja M, Westerbotn M. The impact of learning styles on attitudes to interprofessional learning among nursing students: a longitudinal mixed methods study. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):68.

Figueiredo LDF, Silva NCD, Prado MLD. Primary care nurses’ learning styles in the light of David Kolb. Rev Bras Enferm. 2022;75(6):e20210986.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the students who participated in the study.

Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Iran.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Nursing, Abhar School of Nursing, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran

Seyed Kazem Mousavi

Ph.D Candidate in Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran

Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran

Ali Javadzadeh, Hanieh Hasankhani & Zahra Alijani Parizad

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All the authors helped design the study. AJ and HH collected the data. SKM, and AJ analyzed and interpreted the data. All the authors helped write the manuscript and read and approved the final version.Funding.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seyed Kazem Mousavi .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Permission to conduct the present study was obtained from the Research Department and Ethics Committee of Zanjan University of Medical Sciences (IR.ZUMS.REC.1402.095. available at: https://ethics.research.ac.ir/ ). All the study participants were informed about the objectives of the study, the confidentiality of the information, and the voluntary nature of their participation, and all students completed the informed consent form.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Mousavi, S.K., Javadzadeh, A., Hasankhani, H. et al. Relationship between learning styles and clinical competency in nursing students. BMC Med Educ 24 , 469 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05432-z

Download citation

Received : 23 December 2023

Accepted : 15 April 2024

Published : 26 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05432-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Clinical competence

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Staff & Faculty
• Current Students
• Parents & Family
• Visitors & Community
• Corporate Partnerships
• Support Marymount
• Marymount Shuttles
• Student Counseling Services
• News & Events
• Campus Safety
• Faculty & Staff Directory
• My Marymount
• Registrar’s Office
• Library & Learning Services
• Campus Ministry
• Human Resources
• Office of the President
• Marymount at a Glance
• Points of Pride
• Our Mission, Vision, & Plan
• Capital Location
• Our History
• The Rixey History
• Our Inclusive Community
• Marymount’s Economic Impact
• Involvement & Service
• Distinguished Speakers
• Map and Directions
• Visit Marymount
• Admitted Students
• Undergraduate Students
• Graduate Students
• Online Students
• Non Degree Students
• Summer Programs
• Early College Programs
• Scholarships & Aid
• Early Learning Academy
• New Student Scholarships
• How to Apply
• Types of Aid
• Graduate Student Aid
• Military & Veteran Services
• Financial Aid FAQs
• Tuition & Fees
• Satisfactory Academic Progress Standards
• Office of the Provost
• Academic Calendar
• Majors & Programs
• Online Programs
• Services & Resources
• College of Business, Innovation, Leadership, and Technology
• College of Health and Education
• College of Sciences and Humanities
• Access, Belonging, Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity Hub
• Marymount Global
• Center for Optimal Aging
• Saints’ Service Network
• Faculty Research and Experts
• Commencement
• Student Affairs Administration
• New Student Orientation
• Dining Services
• International Student & Scholar Services
• Student Activities and Events
• Student Accounts
• Commuter Students
• Student Health and Well-being
• Community Standards and Title IX
• Ministry, Activities & Leadership
• Careers, Internships & Employment
• Auxiliary Services
• Campus Safety & Emergency Management
• Student Government Association
• Student Success and Well-being

Home News Six Types of Leadership Styles in Education: A Guide for Educators

Six Types of Leadership Styles in Education: A Guide for Educators

Do you aspire to serve as an educational leader who makes an impact in the lives of students? Exploring different types of leadership styles in education in a Master of Education (M.Ed.) program can help you take your career to new levels of success. 

Education leaders play critical roles in helping students learn and grow while creating safe and inclusive learning environments. But which leadership style is best suited to you? By understanding the following six types of leadership in education and how to leverage them, you can ultimately incorporate the leadership style that’s right for you and your school’s needs.

Understanding Leadership in an Educational Setting

Although most people may think of administration when they think of leadership in education, in reality, teachers and other educators inherently serve as leaders of their respective classrooms. No matter the specific setting, strong educational leadership can make all the difference in achieving desired goals and outcomes while helping students (or other teachers) feel valued and supported.

Significance of Leadership in Education

There’s no overstating the impact of effective leadership in education. Whether it’s a confident teacher leading a classroom of 20 students or a principal working to support their staff, educational leadership lays the foundation for safer learning environments, confident classroom management, and effective learning solutions that benefit everyone.

Exploring Six Types of Leadership Styles in Education

There are six primary leadership styles that are used in education, ranging from transformational to transactional. With an understanding of what each type entails, you can determine which approach may work best for you and your school.

Transformational Leadership Style: A Focused Approach

In simplest terms, transformational leadership in education involves leaders working directly with teams to lead by example. With this form of leadership, it is important to look past self-interests and at the “big picture,” striving toward a shared vision in a team setting. Transformational leaders in education tend to be extremely hands-on, working alongside other educators toward a common goal and making sure everybody’s opinions are considered throughout the process.

Instructional Leadership Style: Guiding Academics

Another common leadership style in education is instructional leadership, which is primarily focused on direct teaching and development of learners. The core purpose of this leadership style is to ensure teachers are empowered to do their jobs well, following the idea that all instructors should be able to rely on their knowledge to teach students while drawing on their unique experiences with minimal “rules” in place.

Constructivist Leadership Style: Building Knowledge Together

Another education leadership style to which many adapt is that of constructivist leadership, focused on identifying a problem and allowing students to come up with their own creative solutions. This type of leadership is effective when it comes to getting students and teachers to collaborate and problem-solve while building confidence and critical thinking skills.

Democratic Leadership Style: Encouraging Participation

For schools or districts in which the goal is to foster widespread collaboration and participation, a democratic leadership style may be the most effective approach for administrators, professors, and other education leaders.

Also commonly known as participative leadership, democratic leadership aims to involve teachers and other staff as much as possible in the decision-making process. The idea is that teacher experiences are valued and a solid reflection of the school’s needs. Taking these employees’ opinions into consideration when making key decisions can help everyone feel involved, heard, and valued.

Emotional Leadership Style: Leveraging Empathy

While perhaps less effective in an administrative leadership setting, emotional leadership  can  be a suitable strategy for leaders in a classroom setting. Essentially, this leadership style allows teachers and classroom leaders to connect with students on an emotional level, becoming mentors with a high degree of awareness. The outcome of this leadership style can lead to students’ ability to form safe bonds with their teachers, which can encourage more open, honest dialogue as well as more inclusive learning.

Transactional Leadership Style: Structured and Directive

Last but not least, transactional leadership is yet another common style used in different levels of education. Through this approach, leaders exchange rewards for those who follow instructions and yield desired outcomes. This style is frequent in classroom settings, especially early childhood education, where students may receive rewards for good performance in class. This can be effective because it reinforces positive behavior—but leaders who follow this style should remain mindful of negative consequences, too.

Impact of Leadership on School Culture

Strong educational leadership can have a major impact on school culture. This remains true in all educational settings, from the smallest of early childhood classrooms to the college lecture hall.

How Leadership Styles Shape School’s Culture

In many ways, the leadership style an educator or other leader follows can influence the overall culture of the classroom or the entire school and district. This is because leadership styles affect the way people within a school communicate and collaborate. Additionally, it plays into how people solve or respond to problems and how core values are followed. All of these are central factors in shaping a school’s learning culture.

Role of Leadership in Developing Positive Learning Environments

The ultimate goal of any educational leader is to help ensure all students and staff (where applicable) can enter an environment where they feel safe, included, and valued. Different leadership styles in early childhood education and other contexts can create the positive learning environments students need to thrive and grow.

How Are Different Leadership Styles Used in Education?

In a number of ways, various leadership styles can enhance performance, improve student learning, contribute to student growth, and even advocate for changing student needs.

The Link Between Leadership Style and School Performance

Effective leadership styles can impact school performance in terms of standardized test scores and other metrics. Educational leaders who create inclusive learning environments can empower students to perform their best day in and day out.

Ways Leadership Styles Affect Student Learning

Students tend to learn best in an environment where they feel their ideas are valued and their efforts are seen. An educational leadership style that supports these ideas can help students learn more readily and effectively.

How Leadership Contributes to Student Growth

All students require support in order to grow throughout their journeys. Effective leadership inside and outside the classroom can help students overcome learning obstacles and achieve their full potential.

Leadership’s Role in Advocating Student Needs

Oftentimes, learners rely on their teachers to recognize and advocate for their needs to administrators and other higher-ups. In this sense, an educational leadership style centered on listening to learners and genuinely valuing their input means educators can more effectively understand and advocate student needs to others in positions of power.

Choosing the Right Leadership Style in Education

Whether you are working as a teacher or in more of an administrative role, choosing and committing to a leadership style is an essential step to take in your career. Of course, not every leadership style is suited for all educators, which is why it’s so crucial to weigh your options and select the leadership style that will best serve the needs of your classroom, school, or district.

Factors to Consider When Choosing a Leadership Style

There is a lot to keep in mind when adopting a leadership style as an educator. First, think about your own strengths and weaknesses and how those might apply to your ultimate choice in leadership style. Do you naturally enjoy collaborating and working with others? If so, then a more transformational or instructional approach may be better.

On the other hand, you’ll also need to consider the needs of your school or classroom. This means taking a step back to assess what your learners truly need, then brainstorming leadership styles that may align best with those needs.

Adapting Leadership Style According to Needs

It’s also important to understand that choosing a leadership style doesn’t necessarily mean you’re committed to that approach for the rest of your career. In fact, your leadership style  should  evolve and change over time rather than remain static. This way, you are constantly reevaluating your strengths, weaknesses, and students’ needs and adapting to make changes as necessary.

How an M.Ed. in Administration and Supervision Program Can Help Form a Leadership Style

If you’re looking to build your confidence and knowledge as an educational leader, it may be time to explore a formal degree program that supports and provides you with the resources you need to thrive. An M.Ed. in administration and supervision can be an ideal way to gain a competitive advantage and expand your career prospects and opportunities.

How an M.Ed. in Administration and Supervision Gives Leaders an Advantage

Specifically, the M.Ed. in administration and supervision  at Marymount University is designed with educational leaders in mind, empowering students to become more effective and innovative leaders while fostering key values such as ethics, social justice, and integrity.

In addition, this program is offered fully online, allowing even the busiest of professionals to continue their crucial work while pursuing an advanced degree that benefits them. As part of this program, students can also pursue their administration and supervision licenses.

Career Opportunities After Master of Education in Administration and Supervision

Those who complete a Master of Education program can expand their career opportunities to encompass any number of in-demand roles, with potential options including:

• Admissions counselor
• Educational researcher
• Senior curriculum specialist
• Leaders in public, private, and Catholic schools

Likewise, all students who complete an  M.Ed. program through Marymount University  are also licensed to teach the following in the state of Virginia:

• Elementary education (PK-6th grade)
• Secondary education (6th-12th grade)
• Special education (K-12th grade)

Potential Salary Ranges for Graduates

The potential salary for a graduate of an M.Ed. program varies greatly depending on a variety of factors, including the exact role, level of experience, and geographic location of the job. However, according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the median pay of an elementary, middle, or high school principal with a master’s degree is  $101,320 per year . Meanwhile, postsecondary education administrators with master’s degrees earn a  median pay of $99,940 per year .

Can an Effective Leadership Style Enhance the Quality of Education?

There’s no denying the impact an effective leadership style can have on the overall quality of student education. Of course, not all leadership styles are ideal for all learning environments; that’s why it’s so essential to carefully assess needs and outcomes before settling on an educational leadership style for you. From there, you can serve as a confident leader who makes a true difference in the lives of your students.

Interested in earning a higher degree in the realm of education? Get in touch with an advisor at Marymount University to learn more about our program options.

https://marymount.edu/academics/education/master-of-education/administration-and-supervision/

https://marymount.edu/academics/education/master-of-education/

https://accountingprofessor.org/what-are-the-8-effective-leadership-styles-in-education/

https://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/postsecondary-education-administrators.htm

(703) 522-5600

Privacy Policy - Terms of Use

• Contact CONTACT MARYMOUNT
• Directions MAPS & DIRECTIONS
• Careers CAREERS AT MARYMOUNT
• Student Jobs JOBS ON CAMPUS (MU STUDENT)

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Title: few-shot calligraphy style learning.

Abstract: We introduced "Presidifussion," a novel approach to learning and replicating the unique style of calligraphy of President Xu, using a pretrained diffusion model adapted through a two-stage training process. Initially, our model is pretrained on a diverse dataset containing works from various calligraphers. This is followed by fine-tuning on a smaller, specialized dataset of President Xu's calligraphy, comprising just under 200 images. Our method introduces innovative techniques of font image conditioning and stroke information conditioning, enabling the model to capture the intricate structural elements of Chinese characters. The effectiveness of our approach is demonstrated through a comparison with traditional methods like zi2zi and CalliGAN, with our model achieving comparable performance using significantly smaller datasets and reduced computational resources. This work not only presents a breakthrough in the digital preservation of calligraphic art but also sets a new standard for data-efficient generative modeling in the domain of cultural heritage digitization.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• HTML (experimental)
• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .