Force, M. (2011). Learning Styles Research – The Difference between Evidence and Bias http://cps.regis.edu/blog/learning-styles-research-%E2%80%93-the-difference-between-evidence-and-bias/ What is essentially Force’s argument? What position would you prefer to take, and on what justification(s)?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just to briefly summarize, Force's article was meant to criticize the article of Neighmond who said that according to Doug Rohrer, a psychologist at the University of South Florida, after reviewing studies of learning styles (specifically on visual and auditory), found no scientific evidence backing up the idea.
I think Force was harsh to say that Neighmond was biased when all she did was just summarize another article of a study made by researchers. I understand that Force was trying to say that we cannot discredit that there are visual and auditory learners because at one end of the spectrum, there are extreme cases and people with real difficulties coping with the normal learning.
Force cited examples of people in military with PTSD and those with mental disabilities (like autism) learn differently and they should not be excluded.
I believe that if Force is referring to extreme cases, of course, they have to be given special attention and special education. Of course, people with extreme psychological cases should be treated under a special guidance.
I also know that learning styles are helpful for teachers to simplify their teaching styles with a large number of students. In a classroom, there maybe some extreme students, and they have to be given more time to learn and teachers can do special classes for them so they can catch up, once the teacher identifies them.
Now, I believe that identifying and profiling what type of learner a student is will be time-consuming for a teacher. I believe as well that as per Neighmond's article that variety in your teaching will keep the students interested.
When I was studying, I know I was interested in reading a book that has a lot of nice pictures in it. However, the teachers I had did not always have visual presentations. I still try to learn to listen and focus and imagine what the teacher was saying. I may fall asleep or get bored sometimes in really long lecture. But the teacher, didn't stop and say she has to stop the lecture because of this.
I believe we can develop our other senses in order to learn. I still believe that learning in all aspects (whether visual or auditory) should be developed, it's not because it's a must, it's because we can.
References:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/08/29/139973743/think-youre-an-auditory-or-visual-learner-scientists-say-its-unlikely
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/learning-styles-debunked-there-is-no-evidence-supporting-auditory-and-visual-learning-psychologists-say.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just to briefly summarize, Force's article was meant to criticize the article of Neighmond who said that according to Doug Rohrer, a psychologist at the University of South Florida, after reviewing studies of learning styles (specifically on visual and auditory), found no scientific evidence backing up the idea.
I think Force was harsh to say that Neighmond was biased when all she did was just summarize another article of a study made by researchers. I understand that Force was trying to say that we cannot discredit that there are visual and auditory learners because at one end of the spectrum, there are extreme cases and people with real difficulties coping with the normal learning.
Force cited examples of people in military with PTSD and those with mental disabilities (like autism) learn differently and they should not be excluded.
I believe that if Force is referring to extreme cases, of course, they have to be given special attention and special education. Of course, people with extreme psychological cases should be treated under a special guidance.
I also know that learning styles are helpful for teachers to simplify their teaching styles with a large number of students. In a classroom, there maybe some extreme students, and they have to be given more time to learn and teachers can do special classes for them so they can catch up, once the teacher identifies them.
Now, I believe that identifying and profiling what type of learner a student is will be time-consuming for a teacher. I believe as well that as per Neighmond's article that variety in your teaching will keep the students interested.
When I was studying, I know I was interested in reading a book that has a lot of nice pictures in it. However, the teachers I had did not always have visual presentations. I still try to learn to listen and focus and imagine what the teacher was saying. I may fall asleep or get bored sometimes in really long lecture. But the teacher, didn't stop and say she has to stop the lecture because of this.
I believe we can develop our other senses in order to learn. I still believe that learning in all aspects (whether visual or auditory) should be developed, it's not because it's a must, it's because we can.
References:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/08/29/139973743/think-youre-an-auditory-or-visual-learner-scientists-say-its-unlikely
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/learning-styles-debunked-there-is-no-evidence-supporting-auditory-and-visual-learning-psychologists-say.html
No comments:
Post a Comment