Unraveling the Myth of Learning Styles and Employee Performance

For decades, the concept of learning styles has been at the forefront of discussions on education and training. The theory says that people learn best when they receive information in a format that aligns with their preferred style - auditory, visual, kinesthetic, etc. Businesses and organizations often implement this theory in their employee training programs, believing it will optimize learning and boost performance. But how valid is it?

Contrary to popular belief, an increasing body of evidence suggests that catering training to specific learning styles doesn't necessarily enhance learning outcomes.

The learning styles concept emerged from Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences, which suggested that individuals excel in different areas of learning. But this doesn't mean that people learn better when taught in their preferred style.

A research study by Pashler et al. (2008) found that there is no substantial evidence supporting the use of learning styles in education. In a comprehensive review of the literature, they found no studies with a methodology robust enough to validate the learning styles theory. Their report concluded, "at present, there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning styles assessments into general educational practice."

More recently, a 2018 paper by Newton and Miah debunked the myth of learning styles in the context of higher education. They argued that students do not benefit from instruction tailored to their reported learning style, and a continued belief in this idea could even be detrimental.

Similarly, in the realm of employee training and development, there's a lack of substantial empirical support for the efficacy of learning styles. Clark (2010) noted that the model lacks rigorous experimental research to back it up in an organizational context. Instead, he argued that effective training should be centered around the nature of the material to be learned and the goals of the training program.

That said, individual differences in learning absolutely exist. However, these are more likely related to factors such as prior knowledge, interest, motivation, and cognitive abilities rather than learning styles.

While the theory of learning styles has intuitive appeal, its application in enhancing employee performance lacks empirical support. Businesses and organizations might be better off investing in more evidence-based training strategies, such as spaced repetition, active learning, and feedback-focused methods.

References

• Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
• Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.
• Newton, P. M., & Miah, M. (2017). Evidence-Based Higher Education – Is the Learning Styles ‘Myth’ Important? Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 444.
• Clark, R. E. (2010). Cognitive and neuroscience research on learning and instruction: Recent insights about the impact of non-conscious knowledge on problem-solving, higher-order thinking skills and interactive multimedia problem-solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 91–110.
• Kirschner, P. A. (2017). Stop propagating the learning styles myth. Computers & Education, 106, 166-171.