Why Studying Kinds Does not Work!
@TeacherToolkit
Ross Morrison McGill based @TeacherToolkit in 2007, and right now, he is among the ‘most adopted educators’on social media on the earth. In 2015, he was nominated as one of many ‘500 Most Influential Individuals in Britain’ by The Sunday Occasions on account of…
Learn extra about @TeacherToolkit
Do college students actually study higher when taught of their most well-liked studying model?
The concept tailoring educating to studying kinds improves outcomes has been completely discredited, but it continues to dominate lecture rooms and instructor coaching worldwide.
A lot so, I – and tens of 1000’s of academics used to have – to report studying kinds on our lesson plans!
Why studying kinds stay fashionable
This new analysis, Studying Kinds, Preferences, or Methods? (Hattie & O’Leary, 2025), evaluates 17 meta-analyses (n = 105,024) and uncovers a persistent perception in studying kinds, regardless of zero proof that matching educating to those kinds improves achievement.
This analysis requires a shift from educating to “most well-liked modalities” to educating efficient studying methods that adapt to job calls for.
The time period “studying kinds” refers back to the perception that college students study finest when taught by way of their most well-liked sensory modality – normally visible, auditory, or kinaesthetic (VAK/VARK). It’s a seductive and easy thought. Nonetheless, the newest analysis says in any other case.
In Hattie & O’Leary’s synthesis, the typical impact measurement for matching educating to studying model preferences is a negligible d = 0.04 – see desk beneath – basically no influence in any respect.
Correlational research (r = 0.24) solely present weak hyperlinks between model preferences and achievement. Crucially, these don’t show causation. The true drawback? Studying kinds typically get conflated with studying methods, deceptive academics into planning round preferences somewhat than evidence-based follow.
Credit score: Hattie & O’Leary, 2025
From fantasy to classroom technique
Regardless of the proof, studying kinds persist in instructor coaching, classroom discuss, and industrial CPD. In actual fact, many academics nonetheless consider matching educating to studying kinds works. Why? As a result of it feels private, supportive and intuitive. However as this analysis explains, it’s additionally scientifically empty. Worse nonetheless, labelling college students by model can cut back expectations and reinforce unhelpful stereotypes.
On my instructor coaching travels, after I survey academics within the room, as a common rule of thumb, major academics and people working in additional schooling schools nonetheless consider that studying kinds exist. Secondary educating colleagues are usually extra astute and updated.
Academics aren’t ignoring science – they’re being misled by outdated concepts that really feel good however do hurt.
As an alternative, educating must be grounded in methods which can be versatile, metacognitive and aware of job complexity.
All academics ought to ditch the VAK checks – and anybody who promotes them in instructor coaching classes. As an alternative, train college students find out how to choose methods that match the duty. Use instruments like retrieval follow, self-questioning, twin coding, and spaced repetition. Promote reflection: ask college students to judge what technique labored finest and why (metacognition). Educate that there’s no “finest approach to study” – simply higher methods for various challenges.
Mannequin this overtly, and keep away from reinforcing the parable by utilizing phrases like “visible learner”. Focus as a substitute on job calls for: Is that this about remembering info or making use of ideas? Modify methods, and train college students to do the identical.
Reflection questions for academics:
- How typically do your educating colleagues check with studying kinds when planning classes?
- Are college students being taught studying methods or labelled by model?
- What classroom routines encourage technique over desire?
- Might academics change VAK quizzes with technique modelling?
- How may beliefs about studying kinds affect expectations?
- What does this analysis imply for SEND planning and assist?
- How can faculties problem the industrial promotion of studying kinds?
- How are academics inspired to mirror on evidence-based follow?
- Do academics use metacognitive language in on a regular basis classes?
- How may CPD be redesigned to give attention to what truly works?
The analysis concludes:
Studying model theories have attraction however, counting on them oversimplifies the intricacies of how college students study. The latest surge of curiosity in selling the correlates of studying kinds is deceptive, of little worth, and must be resisted!
Obtain the total paper to discover the myths, and what works higher than studying kinds.
