Fitting the Pieces Together

In week one of class, I identified myself as a kinesthetic or tactile learner because I felt I learned best by doing. My view on this has changed somewhat over the past several weeks. Primarily, I consider the idea of being a kinesthetic learner more of a preference than a style that I am predisposed to. It is not that I am unable to learn visually or auditorily, but that I prefer to touch, explore, and immerse myself as a way to learn. I have also been forced to consider that the concept of learning styles may be based on research that is questionable.

In Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence (2008) the authors argue that although learning styles are popular; there is a lack of credible evidence for their use in instructional settings.

Our review of the literature disclosed ample evidence that children and adults will, if asked, express preferences about how they prefer information to be presented to them. There is also plentiful evidence arguing that people differ in the degree to which they have some fairly specific aptitudes for different kinds of thinking and for processing different types of information.

Additionally,

Although the literature on learning styles is enormous, very few studies have even used an experimental methodology capable of testing the validity of learning styles applied to education. Moreover, of those that did use an appropriate method, several found results that flatly contradict the popular meshing hypothesis. We conclude therefore, that at present, there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning styles assessments into general educational practice (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, & Bjork, 2008, p. 105).

My preference for learning by doing may be better explained by theories other than those concerning learning styles. Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory, for example, concludes that all humans possess eight distinct intelligences and that none of us possess the same profile of intelligences (Gardner, 2003). Perhaps I prefer to learn by touching and exploring because I possess more bodily-kinesthetic intelligence than spatial or linguistic intelligence. Or, it is possible that Adult Learning Theory best explains my preference because it emphasizes experiential and self-directed learning, and recognizes that experience provides the basis for learning (Conlan, Grabowski, & Smith, 2003). The take-away is that there are concepts within all of the theories we have discussed that may better explain our personal learning preferences than simply assuming that we are each rooted with a specific learning style from birth.

Technology is essential to my learning and helps me to learn according to my preference. As I discussed in my previous blog post on Connectivism, some of my learning connections are personal, but most are within the digital realm. For me, learning by doing includes exploration. Someone may give me the answer to a problem, but I am more likely to remember it if I explore it on my own. Much of my exploration occurs on the Internet through websites, articles, or connections with others on blogs or in forums. I often find that through Internet searches, I get the answers I am looking for and gain additional knowledge in the process.

Thanks,
Brandey

References:

Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., & Smith, K. (2003). Adult learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning

Gardner, H. (2003, April 21). Multiple intelligences after 20 years. Paper presented to the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://www.pz.harvard.edu/PIs/HG_MI_after_20_years.pdf

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9 (3), 103-119. Retrieved October 11, 2010 from http://psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/PSPI_9_3.pdf