The Biggest Myth In Education

Publisert 9. juli. 2021
You are not a visual learner - learning styles are a stubborn myth. Part of this video is sponsored by Google Search.

Special thanks to Prof. Daniel Willingham for the interview and being part of this video.
Special thanks to Dr Helen Georigou for reviewing the script and helping with the scientific literature.
Special thanks to Jennifer Borgioli Binis for consulting on the script.
MinutePhysics video on a better way to picture atoms --


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

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

Massa, L. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2006). Testing the ATI hypothesis: Should multimedia instruction accommodate verbalizer-visualizer cognitive style?. Learning and Individual Differences, 16(4), 321-335. -

Riener, C., & Willingham, D. (2010). The myth of learning styles. Change: The magazine of higher learning, 42(5), 32-35.-

Husmann, P. R., & O'Loughlin, V. D. (2019). Another nail in the coffin for learning styles? Disparities among undergraduate anatomy students’ study strategies, class performance, and reported VARK learning styles. Anatomical sciences education, 12(1), 6-19. -

Snider, V. E., & Roehl, R. (2007). Teachers’ beliefs about pedagogy and related issues. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 873-886. doi:10.1002/pits.20272 -

Fleming, N., & Baume, D. (2006). Learning Styles Again: VARKing up the right tree!. Educational developments, 7(4), 4. -

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. -

Coffield, Frank; Moseley, David; Hall, Elaine; Ecclestone, Kathryn (2004). -

Furey, W. (2020). THE STUBBORN MYTH OF LEARNING STYLES. Education Next, 20(3), 8-13. -

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

Special thanks to Patreon supporters: Mike Tung, Evgeny Skvortsov, Meekay, Ismail Öncü Usta, Paul Peijzel, Crated Comments, Anna, Mac Malkawi, Michael Schneider, Oleksii Leonov, Jim Osmun, Tyson McDowell, Ludovic Robillard, Jim buckmaster, fanime96, Juan Benet, Ruslan Khroma, Robert Blum, Richard Sundvall, Lee Redden, Vincent, Marinus Kuivenhoven, Alfred Wallace, Arjun Chakroborty, Joar Wandborg, Clayton Greenwell, Pindex, Michael Krugman, Cy 'kkm' K'Nelson, Sam Lutfi, Ron Neal

Research and Writing by Derek Muller and Petr Lebedev
Animation by Iván Tello
Filmed by Emily Zhang and Trenton Oliver
Edited by Trenton Oliver
Music by Epidemic Sound
Additional video supplied by Getty Images


  • okay but what if you‘re neurodivergent and have things like ADHD

  • There's credit to the learning styles. I am great with hands on and visual but I'me okay with the rest. Great in some circumstances. Even when I speak I see the things I am talking about. When someone is speaking to me I see what they are saying. Perhaps my strong belief in me being a visual/hands on learner has me tuning out when it's none visual/ hands on learning.

  • I am not surprised so many teachers believe this. When i got my teachers degree in the Netherlands there was a whole class dedicated to this. The class came with a 200+ page book we had to read too. Everything in this class was simply taught as if true, its validity never even came up or was questioned. Only about 2 years ago i found out it had no scientific foundation.

  • Pretty sure I’m a visual learner. I’m deaf.

  • desirable difficulties, spaced repetitions,

  • Maby You're just to blue ;)

  • I would argue that in the test with the pictures, it's less learning and more so simply memory retention. That's why those who used a specific memory strategy performed better.

  • I always thought I was a tactical learner

  • The dispensable tornado inferiorly stretch because snowman presently smoke qua a rapid board. knowing, sloppy canada

  • I'm good at everything

  • I've always found that I can learn... or really, I should say *retain*, knowledge better if I write it down. I've also noticed some instances where I would be able to recall the exact position of information on the page when it was brought up on an exam. However, I won't say that this is the only way that I learn. I do sometimes use visual aides to assist my understanding, and I do wonder if that may relate to my disinterest in reading? One of my favorite examples of this is how I read Steve Wozniak's biography (iWoz), and even though his creations were explained quite well on the page, I really enjoyed all the photos included around the middle of the book. Ultimately, I'd rather see something that's real rather than have someone try to describe it and have me create an interpretation.

  • Of course they remembered more the second time you showed them? I’m so thankful to have Derek tell me what I am 😂

  • How do you identify youre hungry? I dont I just assume

  • Sponsored by GOOGLE SEARCH?

  • It seems like the best teaching method is one that the US Army has been using for a long time. Using methods that match the type of subject being learned and using a ton of repetition as well as memory strategies. Yes the Army loves is acronyms and the reason for it is they work. And then there is the unpopular thing among the education community of there are just some paths you're not able to take. For example, someone who scores average or slightly below average on the ASVAB cannot take classes in Satcom. No amount of learning/teaching styles will help someone to learn in that field if they're just not at that level of learning.

  • A is for "picture of an apple" Yup, not a visual learner.

  • I used to dislike this guy. But I seriously don't know why. He's actually dope. I probably watched a vid that made me feel duped or something. Anyway. If you see this Keep at it man. Love your videos

  • Send this to every education minister in the world.

  • I would say I am all of them.

  • Is this "unscientific test" even that strongly related to the topic? Memorization of images or words aren’t what I associated with word “learning”. This is short term memory processing, and not the acquisition of a skill or the understanding a mechanism. Maybe this was just added to fill up the airtime in the video and give it an “engaging vibe”, but to me this undermines your message and makes me question the conclusion.

  • Heres the thing tho.. in all these tests.. people are being tested right after learning.. essentially cramming. When Im cramming for short term memory, I find the style doesnt matter but the memory strategy does. Mnemonic and stories and such, esp if the test is just a list of things to remember. If I want to remember something long term and really understand it.. and it was all text books or lecture.. i truly feel like it would not happen for me. I need to either see diagrams or preferably physically take part in what i was learning for it to stay long term in my mind. This is not to say that this video is wrong or right or that styles do or do not exist.. i just feel like these tests need to be on more long term memory. See how much someone truly understands versus just quickly remembers.

  • I am a free-style learner

  • Hands on!

  • I'm in the process of doing my National Board Certification, and the "learning styles" theory is still touted by National Board as an essential way to differentiate instruction for students. You'd think a national authority on pedagogy would have noted this and adjusted their material, but they haven't. It definitely made me question the Board's authority in identifying higher quality teaching, because this theory has been proven to be unsupported by research. Teacher training programs and many teacher evaluation systems still use this unsubstantiated pedagogy. It's frustrating as a teacher to constantly hear that my instruction should be data-based, but the institutions that evaluate us do not use criteria that are data and research based.

  • ...Uhhhh....SORRY....YOU are WRONG !!!........

  • Crazy that there really is no evidence for learning styles. In my high school ASL class, we had to take the learning styles test, and if we did not get visual as our highest learning style, we were recommended to drop the class because "non visual learners will struggle with ASL because it is a highly visual language" ( I disagree with that statement, but that is what we were told). I scored 33%, 33% and 34% on the learning styles test meaning I was 33% visual, 33% auditory and 34% kinesthetic, and I was told ASL was not for me. However, I took the class anyways, and did perfectly fine. Sad to see that some people who probably would've done decent in ASL, told that they should not take the class because their supposed learning style did not match.

  • I learn faster when I'm broke.

  • Didn’t know I was a auditory learner til first year of college. High school was a horrible experience.

    • @ToonsOf Fun no. you’re assumption is completely wrong. See I took college a class in high school cuz I needed the credits. Happened to be psychology. The teacher referred me to person who had me take a test. Auditory and memory based learner.

    • Well you had lectures in High school aswell maybe shorter thats all. I would asume you came to that conclusion because you study things you are actually interested in at uni. You will therefore pay more attention and come to the false conclusion e.g thinking you are a auditory learner. Also you have to pay for uni (opportunity cost and loans) so you are "forced" to focus more aswell.

  • For me it comes down to writing notes, listening, watching and doing. Having gone through chemo therapy my brain does not seem to work like it used to, it seems ADHD is causing me issues these days but the same way I learn best is the way I indicated.

  • I think stiles do exist, and the problems is that most teachers use a maximum of two(usually reading/writing and auditory) when they teach. All of the styles need to be used for a better engagement with the students.

  • In my school, the teachers always tried to engage all four learning styles during a lesson, which frankly was super helpful, but only because it meant we had to engage our brains in a variety of ways while learning a new topic, which made the information stick really well.

  • Involvement is the key :)

  • As an University Professor (I teach Physics) I find this topic very relevant, the video is great and I also liked that you took the time to mention how society as a whole pays the price for unfounded strategies and policies. We should seek what works not what fits our personal philosophy. How to know if something works? The Scientific Method (SM) states that you should search for any evidence that contradicts your hypothesis not the one the favors it. This is so basic and so applicable to everyday life that I really believe SM should be taught as early as possible in school. But I am not American so I don't know how your school system works.

  • and, plenty of things have been accepted in to education with ZERO research or factual evidence to support them.

  • in order to be a visual learner, that falls in the category of trained visual observer. same with auditory. each of these are the same in that one must train their brain to take in information this way. it is the same with any learning or observation method i also believe that combining multiple input methods increases learning ability to some degree.

  • as someone with adhd, that memory test looks like a nightmare lol. the reason i consider myself a visual is because if i cant look back to what what was just said, i literally will not remember it. i need a visual support to be able to tie in the first part that was taught with the second part

  • I used to teach math. I didn't focus on learning styles (kinda hard to do, given the topic). What I did do was focus on engaging with existing knowledge, giving clear, step-by-step instruction, and give students the chance to immediately confirm their knowledge. Mental engagement with immediate feedback. A silent classroom was treated as a confused classroom.

  • I don’t feel like I’m any of Vark… I learn best when I talk about and apply the information I’m given. It doesn’t have to be hands on. I just need to dissect the information I’m given in any format verbally out load or in writing. One strategy I use I work if I don’t understand something is I write a blog on it to explain it. Things click more when I’m writing to explain it.

  • I think this topic is much larger than you were able to cover in this short video. I don't have an opinion on learning styles, but I know that a lecturer presenting information, with visual and verbal details, doesn't stick very well for me. If I'm able to have a to and fro with the educator to discuss my understanding of the topic, and accept corrections and criticisms, I do much better. My point being, information repeated back is memory, answering an exam question is memory, but learning requires integration of information to become knowledge and understanding, and I believe that can only happen through to-and-fro discussion and critical thinking. Practical use of knowledge is then another skilll. Also important to remember that you can only form knowledge from information available to you, the integrity of which should always be questioned. I still fall back to my favourite interpretation of wisdom, the only thing I know is that I know nothing.

  • Repetition learner

  • learning styles dont exist... the horror

  • People love to make associations. Even if they don't exist

  • im type 5 - terrible learner

  • Learning styles have to do with our personalities too. When I say I am a visual learner it means that I like to get all the information at once on one plate, allowing me to choose the order in which I will be learning different parts of it myself. It also gives me a chance to learn things in comparison. No lecture allows me to choose the preferred order or can present 2 things at once for me to easily compare, which simply results in me losing all interest and falling asleep. But some get overwhelmed when all the information is not split into small portions and is loaded into one diagram without a clear order in which it's meant to be digested. Those people would enjoy a lecture way more. It's not about the sensory channel, it's about the characteristics of each channel that we either like or dislike.

  • Interesting. I'm not really sure what my preferred learning style is, but I know it isn't auditory. Not because I'm incapable of learning by listening, but rather because listening to someone drone on for an hour or so becomes white noise.

  • Commenting this before watching the video. I am a mix of all. I have to read, write, listen, and see. I'm in a good university and I have always felt inferior because I need to do so many things before I learn. I envy people who just listens, just watches, etc. but I found a way that works for me and that's all that matters.

    • OMG IM NOT AN IDIOT. I am so happy rn. I am actually so happy. So this is what it feels like to have your insecurity disproved!

  • Just so I’m understanding this, the video was basically all about confirmation bias?

  • Google is the LAST search engine to use if you want accurate, reliable, and unbiased information.

  • As a computer engineering student I feel like they are all important. While taking lectures I listen to the professor but I also need to read slides with both written informations and graphic explanations (of algorithms or circuit architecture for example) and to highlight or write note about additional things. Then is fundamental doing exercises as practice is the only way to internalize a great amount of informations

  • Google search got caught admitting bias and censorship since 2016…

  • I'm no research scientist, but the tests cited seemed straight up BAD. VARK could be way off, but these tests claiming to "put a nail in the coffin" of learning styles aren't even remotely conclusive. For example, only testing college students all with the same anatomy major in the same school is an aggressively biased sample. It's like an ostrich with their head in the sand claiming light is a myth. Where are the self starting entrepreneurs? The high school drop outs that succeeded teaching themselves but couldn't learn in class to save their lives? Those on the autistic spectrum with completely different learning styles, pretty much by definition? Children, that haven't been completely inculcated with public school's style of teaching? Dyslexics? ESL students that literally have to write out recorded lessons and translate them word by word(my dad)? Savants with 80 IQ that learn and play songs with a single hearing? Others that see a scene once and can draw it with near perfect accuracy? Those with speech problems? ADHD? I know genius level IQ people that can't focus on text for more than a couple sentences but can ace all their tests by using their other faculties. My two kids(one of which is autistic) with nearly identical DNA learn with stubbornly different styles. You really only need one example to prove the existence of something, and there's clearly so many more than one. Educators and parents(probably) overwhelmingly believe in styles, because they see day after day the exact same education styles failing to teach kids with the same effectiveness. They also see, different styles of teaching have gigantic results in improving learning for various struggling students. What is every tutor using a basketball analogy doing, if not using a different learning style to help a student who failed to grasp what they heard, or read? I'd love for teaching styles to be a myth. I'd have so much more hair, and less gray ones too. The fact is the same style of teaching doesn't work for all people. Period. I'd argue there isn't even a convincing alternative explanation if "learning styles is a myth". Reading text isn't necessarily "auditory" as the example test suggests(completely invalidating those results). A visual learner could be painting pictures with the words more than listening to their own voice in their head reading the text. Clearly there's also more abstract, spatial, emotional, narrative and conceptual ways that brains work with beyond the standard auditory, visual, and kinesthetic, not to mention interest and ability to focus, none of which have been accounted for in these "studies". Just having a preference for one style also might not be competitive with learning in multiple styles, and this could account for poor results on the tests looking to isolate more absolute preferences. They could be more of a blended style spectrum to account for deficits and be confusing test results(like someone who struggles with reading could be compensating with higher aptitude, logical thought experimentation, listening closely to the lecture, and/or tons of extra rote work). This, however, in no way invalidates the examples of clear preference, and certainly doesn't take into account neural plasticity creating the possibility of compensating for preference over time. I can verbally tell my dad 100 times(literally) how to do something on the computer. I can show him visually 100 times(literally) how I do something on the computer. He will never learn it unless I sit him down, and physically make him go through the steps himself by hand. Email, googling, even math(he was a math major). He will, no joke, rewrite exactly what I show him before he can get it. Then he can get it immediately. He's a kinesthetic boomer. It's not confirmation bias. I don't want this to be true. He just is. I wish to God I could just send him video, or tell him what to do over the phone. A literal lifetime of trying every other way has stacked the evidence that he truly has a learning style, and he's not even close to being the only one. It's not a double blind study, but it's closer to a case study than an anecdote. Proving the existence of different learning styles really only requires one example. I've given many. They may not all fall cleanly into VARK's categorical preferences, and clearly we have much to learn about the human brain, but problems with VARK's limitations in no way invalidates clear evidence for learning styles generally.

  • I think the learning styles "myth" most likely comes from more people being neurodivergent then we knew before. Because when you'r neurodivergent learning in some ways is almost impossible. It's all about the different ways our brains work. I know a lot of people that have auditory processing disorder as well as other things that could fall under the Neurodiversity umbrella that could fit with the learning styles myth.

  • I can learn from all 4 but it depends on the subject which works best.

  • The thing is, learning isnt memorising (at least it shouldn’t be) its understanding, this test was for memorising things that have no reason or rhyme, so its going to be completely different to understanding, therefore this isnt a good experiment. People have a harder time repeating information that doesnt make sense then actually understanding a concept and then explaining it in their own words

  • what if i learn better with both verbal and visual demonstration?

  • "What kind of learner are you?" Lazy.

  • I was really surprised that my learning style test showed me to be equal parts visual and auditory: I'm an art major with excellent visual memory and spacial reasoning, and I have auditory processing disorder which means there's a significant lag in the time it takes me to understand what I'm hearing, and I often can't understand or remember subtle auditory details like what different accents sound like or what the tune of a song I've heard once recently is. I'm not incompetent with auditory stuff: my pronunciation in languages I'm practiced in is very good and I've played music for years and can sing very well, but it is more difficult for me and takes much more effort than it should, normally.

  • I’m a professional educator. We aren’t taught VARK to learn to tailor instruction to individual students. We learn VARK as a metric to determine the effectiveness of a lesson. When possible, a lesson should hit all 4 modalities. Essentially what you call the Multimedia Effect is VARK to teachers. It’s basically just a way to maintain a diversity of approaches to the material, which objectively makes it more engaging.

  • Encouraging critical thinking while also supporting Google as a trustworthy source for true and _unbiased_ information? Wow, my respect for this channel just fell about three pegs.

  • my brain will take the information when it wants to so i can't put my hand into this convo

  • I always suspected that there were no thing like learning styles, or at least not for me. I remember many times, when asked, I would answer that this subject would be easier to learn if someone explained it to me while other times I would say that I would learn better if I saw it visually. I never managed to decide what kind of learner I was.

  • Parents in India- Slaps are the best teaching strategy.

  • i learn by taking notes - like, if i don't write it down I will 100% never remember that thing, and i need to write every single word to able to internalize it. don't know what tipe of learner does that makes me

  • i learnt this in NLP 15 years ago - except i dont remember the wRighting bit

  • I don't quite like the test. Learning is not the same as remembering.

  • Hear the info, write it in your own words, study your written notes for tests: BOOM! You’ve passed!

  • Visual learner? Some concepts are too complex to be accompanied by visual material. But, of course, even the retarded kids should be thoroughly educated, hence this video.

  • It seems like everyone is a visual learner & I'm over here being an auditory learner lol

  • google search is controversial

  • Stress. I'm extremely good at memorizing stuff when stressed. That's why I've always studied 1 o 2 days before the exams and sometimes I even get honors.

  • The biggest myth, is "how to _learn_ more." Truth is... most people aren't raised to "learn properly." You can't teach an adult to be inquisitive. Same; you can't teach an adult to "learn." Kids~> must be raised in an environment to "know _how_ to learn."

    • Metacognition is the word for it for those wondering

  • Years ago I came to the conclusion that the teachers are key in learning material. When I was thought Pi by our math teacher, he gave up teaching that year. Not until 10 years ago I saw a gif displaying how Pi really works, it was the first moment it clicked. I memorized the Pi number, knew what it was used for to calculate it. But never really understood the core principle behind it. Mr Mars (still remember the math teachers name to this date) decided the loud kids in the room were reason for him to cross his arms and read a book till class was over for the entire year. Most people I talked with that had a good teacher still remember them, had better study results and got further with their study. Unfortunately great students get great teachers, while students that have trouble learning often end up with the teachers that should not teach and do not have good skills.

  • Wether you learn something or pay attention to what taught or not is your choice, and can be based on your mood that day. I think being taught in your prefered larning style, even if it doesn't help, it's our PREFERENCE. meaning we will make a conscious choice to pay attention and learn better if we are taught in our PREFERRED lerning style. So keep teaching and learning!

  • For me, I don't learn if I write on paper or do something(like for example a test in chemistry). But audio- and visual teaching makes me learn something well. I also learn almost as well when writing on computer. I don't think learning as remembering, but as understanding the subject and having the ability to utilize the subject in something useful.

  • this is really flawed uh 'test'

  • idk man, i had such a hard time grasping how an engine works but when i saw it with all its pieces and seeing how they were supposed to move it all made sense. Memorization is not the same as learning and understanding.

  • My learning style is "If I find it interesting I'll know everything about it"

  • OK, finished the video, and I'm really disappointed: I could have told you the same thing. I was expecting more unusual findings, but you're just saying that you need to look at maps to learn geography and listen to music to learn music....uh, obviously?

  • Haven't finished watching the video yet, but there's a HUGE difference between learning and memorizing. Learning involves understanding, whereas memorizing doesn't. For memorizing a bunch of random words, you're going to need a strategy regardless of your learning style.

  • Learning styles are real in a way, at least for me. I understand many things wayyy better with visuals and hands on. Sure words sometimes help, but my goodness certain instructions need 0 words for me. Just give me good images of how things should go and where, and I will understand. If I don't, I can figure it out hands-on. Words just bore me unless I'm in English class.

  • When you are at the college level it’s possible the individual has already adapted their learning style so any new information can be assimilated no matter what style is used. Most kids have not been taught or learned how to do this yet and struggle to learn and retain information. Let’s also remember stress is a huge factor in learning.

  • Hmm, I'm doubtful of both sides. On one hand, I think that interest in the subject at hand is what actually makes people learn. The idea is that you have to understand a concept before you can claim you learned it, so I'm not really sold with VARKs though I do admit like some people's interest is piqued when they are attuned to devices of learning (visually, auditory, kinesthetically, etc.), basically it's still their INTEREST that made them learn something. On the other hand, I feel like most of the disproving studies (including the one you performed on the streets) are simply inadequate. You see memorizing is VERY DIFFERENT from understanding. Memorizing is more like a simple copy-paste from a stack that's already in your brain while understanding is more like your thought process travelling through a road that makes sense of a concept. Simply put, I wouldn't say there is a set template to learning. This VARKs functions more of a social construct just to make this a little easier to understand. In my case, regardless of visual or auditory presentation, I can only say I've learned something if I can imagine the concept in my head and IT MAKES SENSE. At the end of the day, everyone learns at their own pace with varying qualities of absorbed concepts.

  • Your experiment was designed to prove your point. The people were asked to remember 10 things. Their brains were not engaged. By the third test they were actively engaged. If you had given them 3 different visual test they would have done better on the third one also. Different people have different brains, I am dyslexic I do not learn by reading.

  • Beautiful video

  • The guy at 3:00 is the only honest one of them all.

  • Add this to the list of "tests" I was taught in high school that would supposedly shape my future. This was a fascinating video. Thanks for sharing.

  • The cute battle exclusively drown because rail lovely knot save a automatic poison. erratic, conscious package

  • If this learning thing is not true then maybe you can say that some are just better and/or faster learners than others. I know that people in my university class were able to learn most things needed to pass a test from attending the class. I, on the other hand, can basically retain nothing from things said in class, I need it written down and I need to repeat and understand it.

  • This doesn't appear to disprove learning styles or even really touch on learning styles except in a completely decorative way. It doesn't test learning styles at all -- it tests short term memory. If you give someone 10 words/things to remember, and then immediately ask them to say those things back to you, they aren't relying on "learning" style, they aren't learning any new information, and indeed 'learning' doesn't come into play. They already know all those words, the only that comes into play here is whether or not they can remember them, which, short term memory-wise, should end up averaging to remembering around 7 pieces of information, give or take 2 (as confirmed by this video, and our studies on short term memory). If you asked them years later to give you those words, whether you showed them pictures or said the words out loud, it's unlikely that any of these people would remember a single one of them -- not because none of them learn visually or auditorily and the learning styles are a myth, but because you're not testing learning styles, you're testing short term memory and they didn't "learn" anything, short term or long term. Now if you were actually teaching them something new and then came back years later to see if they remembered the thing you taught them (either taught through pictures, or by explaining it to them w/o pictures), that would be a test not just of memory, but also of whether or not they really 'learned' anything. Even then, this is fundamentally flawed because he just asked people on the street to tell him how they learn best, which they don't necessarily know, and especially so if they are not in a learning environment (among other confounding factors). It's concerning that this channel is passing itself off as educative while providing videos that are based entirely on fallacious reasoning. Even more concerning is that Google is attaching itself to this and providing significantly more credence to this flawed argument. Then again, putting together logically invalid 'studies' and videos and passing them off as any sort of legitimate education seems to be this guy's modus operandi.

  • great video, keep up the good work! I'm a visual learner btw

  • anyone else just suck at studying? lol

  • All of the following is anecdotal, but here is my analysis I agree with some points, like that when you need to learn about geography you need visual learning. Makes sense, it's a visual topic. But as also mentioned there are some people who have skills that measure highly for the 'styles of learning' (mentioned perfect pitch related to music), but I think where you can see this is when students are lacking at certain skills, for example a student who is hard of sight, or blind. Without question, their learning style would not be visual, right. But if we take a less drastic example like someone like myself with ADHD who will perform best with visual or kinesthetic learning (and poorly with lecture or reading material), you will see them perform poorly in certain subjects (reading/lit, history). SO when we talk about neurotypical students, yes, all modes included where available is good, but it's because the gap between their skills is not enough to effect them. For someone it may be EASIER to learn via reading, but they still CAN learn via other methods. And the biggest the disparity the less applicable. So a subject that is even just conceptually hard for a student, they will perform better when learning is to their strengths.

  • Is learning the same as memorizing? I’m confused.

  • i hate this kind of garbage. the school system is trash, and "science" questions like these always leave the fundamental autocracy of school untouched. the sudbury model is still the best model... but our underlying cynicism about kids and people keeps us perpetuating the autocracy.

  • Why Google need to sponsor 🤔🙄

  • I don't think learning is the same as being shown a list of random objects that we already know and then recalling them from short term memory. That would be memorization.

  • "Learning by making mistakes" is my learning-style, be it visual, text-based, auditory or hands-on. The cheaper version: "Learning from some-one else's mistake." works sometimes as well.

  • “I don’t, I just assume”

  • I knew this was another one BS thing not to pay attention to lol just an excuse for why people can't learn in lectures. Not that lecturing is ideal, but people making excuses is predictable.