Daniel L. Dinsmore, Luke K. Fryer, Meghan M. Parkinson
{"title":"学习风格的假设是错误的,但是有一些学生特征的模式是有用的","authors":"Daniel L. Dinsmore, Luke K. Fryer, Meghan M. Parkinson","doi":"10.1080/00405841.2022.2107333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The learning styles hypothesis—and particularly the meshing hypothesis—state that learners’ preferences about their preferred modality of learning (i.e., visual, aural, or kinesthetic) predict learning gains on academic tasks. Despite the fact that this hypothesis is not borne out by the scientific evidence available to us, it still remains in widespread classroom use. This article begins by discussing the evidence against learning styles. Second, the article discusses why teachers might continue to believe in and use learning styles in their classroom as well as why essentialist beliefs about learning are not helpful. Finally, 3 variables that do impact student learning—knowledge, strategies, and interest are discussed. Each is defined, their development and measurements are discussed, and finally some instructional examples are given. Replacing the use of learning styles in the classroom with instructional decisions based on the development of knowledge, strategies, and interest can improve student learning outcomes across a wide range of subjects and grade levels.","PeriodicalId":48177,"journal":{"name":"Theory Into Practice","volume":"139 1","pages":"418 - 428"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The learning styles hypothesis is false, but there are patterns of student characteristics that are useful\",\"authors\":\"Daniel L. Dinsmore, Luke K. Fryer, Meghan M. Parkinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00405841.2022.2107333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The learning styles hypothesis—and particularly the meshing hypothesis—state that learners’ preferences about their preferred modality of learning (i.e., visual, aural, or kinesthetic) predict learning gains on academic tasks. Despite the fact that this hypothesis is not borne out by the scientific evidence available to us, it still remains in widespread classroom use. This article begins by discussing the evidence against learning styles. Second, the article discusses why teachers might continue to believe in and use learning styles in their classroom as well as why essentialist beliefs about learning are not helpful. Finally, 3 variables that do impact student learning—knowledge, strategies, and interest are discussed. Each is defined, their development and measurements are discussed, and finally some instructional examples are given. Replacing the use of learning styles in the classroom with instructional decisions based on the development of knowledge, strategies, and interest can improve student learning outcomes across a wide range of subjects and grade levels.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory Into Practice\",\"volume\":\"139 1\",\"pages\":\"418 - 428\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory Into Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2107333\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory Into Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2107333","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
The learning styles hypothesis is false, but there are patterns of student characteristics that are useful
ABSTRACT The learning styles hypothesis—and particularly the meshing hypothesis—state that learners’ preferences about their preferred modality of learning (i.e., visual, aural, or kinesthetic) predict learning gains on academic tasks. Despite the fact that this hypothesis is not borne out by the scientific evidence available to us, it still remains in widespread classroom use. This article begins by discussing the evidence against learning styles. Second, the article discusses why teachers might continue to believe in and use learning styles in their classroom as well as why essentialist beliefs about learning are not helpful. Finally, 3 variables that do impact student learning—knowledge, strategies, and interest are discussed. Each is defined, their development and measurements are discussed, and finally some instructional examples are given. Replacing the use of learning styles in the classroom with instructional decisions based on the development of knowledge, strategies, and interest can improve student learning outcomes across a wide range of subjects and grade levels.
期刊介绍:
Published since 1962, Theory Into Practice (TIP) is a nationally recognized, peer reviewed journal featuring multiple perspectives and scholarly, yet practical and engaging, discussions of important issues in education. TIP publishes articles covering all levels and areas of education, including learning and teaching; counseling; assessment; teacher education and professional development; classroom management; administration and supervision; curriculum; policy; and technology. Each issue of TIP is devoted to a timely theme developed by a Guest Editor who has expertise in the theme area.