There is much debate in the L&D field as to the legitimacy of learning styles and if they even exist.
We cover Learning Styles including Honey & Mumford in our CIPD programme but always like to provide information and raise awareness about what this could potentially mean for you and to help your thinking about when you learn most effectively.
We like to provide balance (like here) so you can make up your own mind about how you may or may not use Learning Styles to help inform your own design.
It is with interest that the Learning Styles Challenge is now in it's 8th year and the 'reward' is up to $5000
The challenge is....
If any person or group can create a real-world learning intervention that takes learning styles into account--and proves that such an intervention produces better learning results than a non-learning-styles intervention. If they do this they'll be awarded $5,000!
The rules can be found here
For anyone in learning this is worth reading and looking in to as 5 L&D professionals put up £1000 dollars each - no-one has ever collected on the award as of yet.
So where does this leave us?
- Are learning styles a myth as this research here suggests?
- Do we try and pigeon hole learners and tell them they fit in one or more specific areas?
- Do we use false methodology in our learning design?
- Do learning styles still help us identify and think through how we learn most effectively?
I'd be keen to hear your views on Learning Styles.....
Do you think they help or hinder?
Do you use Learning Styles when designing your learning interventions and if so how?
Are you up for taking on the challenge?