Learning Styles: Do They Exist?

Sir Ken Robinson is a British author and speaker who took the TED Talk stage to speak about how the culture of American education contradicts three things that help humans and human life thrive. Those three things outlined in his TED Talk are diversity, curiosity and creativity. In his speech, he talked about gaps in the American education system, and the importance of individualized learning within schools. He also mentioned that it is important to value teachers and to think of their job as an important contribution to the future. While comparing American schools to other schools around the globe, he declared that America must rethink their schools system.

I thought that throughout his dialogue of what American schools have gotten wrong throughout the years and what they can do better to support their students, he made some important, reflective points. One of these points revolves around testing within in schools, standardized and nonstandardized. Robinson thinks that the dominant culture of education has become solely focused on tests, which he believes to be wrong. In his speech he stated that, “Assessment should support learning, it shouldn’t obstruct it, which it often does.” I think that this is a very controversial topic within school systems, but is also important to think about and consider from many different viewpoints. I think that assessment, which oftentimes results in testing, is crucial in the classroom to know where students are at, what they understand and what they can improve on. With that said, I also think it is important to be mindful and cognisant of how often students are testing, why testing can be stressful and how said tests can affect learners. For me when I take tests or quizzes I only seem to memorize the material, take the test or quiz and then forget everything I learned. This happens to me because I am always so focused on the grade or score I will get, not so much about what I am retaining from the material. I think this is one of the ways assessment can limit learners from knowledge and obstruct active learning, which is why I believe this is a crucial topic for educators to actively think about and engage with.

The second most important point that I think Robinson discussed was about the real role of leadership in education. He thinks that an educators job is to be aware and facilitate “climate control”. He talked about this in the sense that educators must create a climate in their classrooms and schools of possibility. Robinson states that when teachers do that, “people will rise to that and achieve things that you completely did not anticipate and couldn't have expected.” I like the way that he framed this as “climate control”, because I think it gives educators a different lens to look through when thinking about giving students chances and opportunities in the classroom. The reason I think this point is important is simply because all students in a classroom and in a whole school have many different needs and things they're good at. I think that teachers must celebrate the differences and give students equitable experiences to thrive in their own individual ways. Those different ways may include working with a specific student much harder than you work with other students because they don't understand the material, giving a student material that is more challenging because they are excelling in class, and everything in between. If teachers do not give their students that kind of support and climate in the classroom, than students may not ever see their potential or the possibilities that await them.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Although Robinson brought up some important points, I think that a lot of what he said in his speech can be countered against. One of the most valid criticisms of his speech was from an education blogger, teacher, author and expert on education research named Tom Bennett. Bennett stated as a counter, “I tire of someone who has never been a classroom teacher telling me what classroom teaching is like, or how children should be taught.” I thought that this was an interesting and valid point because overall, I do not think that Robinson has a clear idea about how hard teachers and educators work to do all of the things (and more) that he was saying are lacking from the American education system. Because he was never a classroom teacher, he does not understand and misses out on things teachers experience such as building genuine relationships between teachers and students to provide support and success in and out of the classroom.

The second counter argument that I thought was most valid was stated by cognitive scientist, Dan Willingham. Willingham pointed out that the way Robinson was talking about the American education system and education reform was not in a productive, “revolutionary” way. Willingham stated that he wanted Robinson to tell him what is going to make things different this time around. I think that this is important because complaining about things without doing anything about them will not make anything better. In fact, this could lead to a worse climate regarding the education system. I do not believe it was fair of Robinson to go up on stage and bash the American education system without offering ideas or inputs on what could make it more successful.

The main idea behind the use of “Learning Styles” is that learners are categorized into many different, unique styles. People may fall under one or more specific types of styles, and it is believed that if you teach students according to their style, it will result in improved learning. After reading the article titled “All You Need to Know About the ‘Learning Styles’ Myth, in Two Minutes”, I feel a little confused on where my stance is regarding “Learning Styles”. I think that because this is something that has been discussed all throughout my life, I have grown accustomed to saying what my “Learning Style” is and how it supports me, even if it truly doesn’t.

In the article I thought it was interesting when it talked about how people depend on “Learning Styles” simply because, “It’s more comforting to my ego to think that a class was difficult because of a teaching style I didn't like than because I wasn’t concentrating or because I’m simply not clever or motivated enough” instead of thinking of themselves as low ability. The small amount of evidence behind the idea that “Learning Styles” don’t exist proves that often what happens with said “Learning Styles” is that everyone performs better when they are taught by one style. This evidence makes sense to me because if everyone has different needs and learns in different ways, than the most effective way to learn something new that you are not familiar with would be to understand that specific thing simply through the way it is presented to you, especially in a large group setting. I only have one question or limitation I can think of to go along with that idea. That limitation is if students are teaching themselves something or trying to understand something on their own, how might they know what what the nature of the material is? In other words how would they know how to most effectively learn and understand the material without resorting to what works best for them, also known as their own “Learning Style”? With all these different beliefs, ideas and evidence regarding “Learning Styles”, it makes me think more about how they might be considered a myth and not productive. Overall I think that I would need more clear evidence to back this idea up before I could give a reasonable, and truthful yes or no answer to whether I think “Learning Styles” exist or not.