![]() We know that the use of practice tests and other strategies that promote retrieval from long-term memory are very effective when studying clinically related topics ( Dobson et al., 2017, 2018) and their use is associated with improved performance on clinical licensing exams ( Deng et al., 2015). We know that human working memory is very limited, and that this represents a bottleneck for learning which can be managed via the techniques used in Cognitive Load Theory ( Young et al., 2014). There is much we do know about the neuroscience of learning that could and should be applied to medical education. Findings from our recent systematic review suggested that ∼89% of educators believe that matching instruction to Learning Styles will result in improved instruction, although there some methodological concerns about the studies reviewed ( Newton and Salvi, 2020). Belief in neuromyths has been extensively studied. This misapplication of the neuroscience of learning to education has led to Learning Styles being portrayed as a “neuromyth” ( Dekker et al., 2012). This hypothesis, known as the Meshing or Matching hypothesis ( Pashler et al., 2008) has been tested repeatedly and shown not to result in improved learning ( Krätzig and Arbuthnott, 2006 Massa and Mayer, 2006 Pashler et al., 2008 Papanagnou et al., 2016 Aslaksen and Lorås, 2019 Rogowsky et al., 2020), and the reliability of the underlying preferences is often weak ( Coffield et al., 2004). Upon identification of a preferred style, one interpretation of the theory is then that learners will achieve more if they are taught, and study, using their preferred style. Amongst the most common are the VARK (Visual, Auditory, Read/Write, Kinesthetic) classification, along with Kolb’s Learning Styles Inventory and a similar system developed by Honey and Mumford ( Newton, 2015). Up to 70 different instruments are used in this way ( Coffield et al., 2004). In educational theory, an individual’s Learning Style is normally identified via a questionnaire which asks learners about their preferences for the way they learn, often using terms and theories that give the impression of being derived from the neuroscience of cognition ( Coffield et al., 2004). Here we offer perspectives from both research and student about this apparent mismatch between educational practice and clinical practice, along with recommendations and considerations for the future. ![]() Thus any educator who sought out the research evidence on Learning Styles would be given a consistent but inaccurate endorsement of the value of a teaching technique that is not evidence based, possibly then propagating the belief in Learning Styles. This is in sharp contrast to the fundamental principle of evidence-based practice within these professions. As in earlier research on Higher Education, we found that the use of Learning Style frameworks persist in education research for the health professions 91% of 112 recent research papers published on Learning Styles are based upon the premise that Learning Styles are a useful approach to education. ![]() ![]() We evaluated current research papers from the field of health professions education, to characterize the perspective that an educator would be given, should they search for evidence on Learning Styles. This perspective article is a follow up on prior research aimed at understanding why belief in the neuromyth of Learning Styles remains so high. Despite this lack of evidence, prior research shows that that belief in the Learning Styles “neuromyth” remains high amongst educators of all levels, around the world. This promise is not supported by evidence, and is in contrast to our current understanding of the neuroscience of learning. Learning Styles theory promises improved academic performance based on the identification of a personal, sensory preference for informational processing. Swansea University Medical School, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.Newton * Hannah Farukh Najabat-Lattif Gabriella Santiago Atharva Salvi
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |