Support NeoGAF

[EviLore]

I looked through the scientific papers as well. Checks out. There's little evidence supporting the widely popularized "learning styles" hypothesis which groups students into visual learners, auditory learners, reading learners, etc., and aims to give each group specialized instruction.

Combined approaches -- i.e. traditional instruction that utilizes textbooks, lectures, blackboards, media, and interactive exercises -- are the best way to learn for everyone.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Actual teaching involves some sort of text book and teachers have a 30min-1 hr window to make an impact on students.

 

[Birdo]

I only learn things through dance.

 

[KielCasto]

I find this topic really interesting. In my early years in college, I remember reading articles doubting the effectiveness (and existence) of learning styles. Since then, I didn’t think of myself as an auditory listener. Rather, I immersed myself into lessons through different approaches. Worked wonders for me.

I’m in the camp that believes that the engagement of the learner is the biggest factor of learning. He says something about actively thinking of the material, which makes someone learn best, and I agree with that.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Text books can be very efficient, but adhd bro!

 

[MastaKiiLA]

As a former teacher, I can definitely say that students take to different methods of instruction. There's no one size fits all approach, and traditional methods is definitely not the best approach. It's outdated and outmoded. We often forget how many of our fellow classmates struggled in school, when we were being taught the traditional way.

When I took ed classes for my master's, one of the best professors I have used a really creative discovery method of teaching. She essentially threw us into groups, with a bunch of manipulatives and paper on a table, and had us learn the math topic she was teaching through discovery. It's hard to explain, because in most cases, we started off the lesson completely lost and confused, but through some simple instructions, and random nudges, we'd finally arrive at the solution, and a deeper understanding of the topic. Through group study, and a diversified-but-largely-physical teaching style, she taught math to people of all different levels and intelligence.

The thing is, that method of teaching couldn't work for most topics in most subject areas. It has limited use. However, it did make it clear that there are huge benefits in non-traditional methods of teaching.

The best school I ever taught at was a montessori school. That's also fairly non-traditional, with a greater blend of individual and group learning. The kids were happier, and learned a lot better. I wasn't great at it, as I had traditional learning pretty deeply engrained in me at the time. But I did the best I could with it. I think there's room for flexibility in education. I don't think sticking to tradition is the right approach at all. I also don't like the idea of a school district enforcing any particular style of teaching on educators.

I think we need better teachers, and we get that by raising teacher salaries. Right now, you're getting people who look to teaching as a last resort, and then a bunch of liberal arts majors. For STEM, you need engineers and scientists who understand the subject matter, and can relay that information to students in creative and fun ways.

I think we also need to shrink class sizes. 30+ kids crammed into a classroom means more kids falling by the wayside. You can't give a struggling student the necessary added assistance, because there are just too many of them to keep close enough tabs on. You have to balance getting through the curriculum, while maintaining an orderly classroom. Time is at a premium in these cases, and crowded classrooms increase how much of that balance goes to maintaining order.

I think better teachers and smaller class sizes go well together, and you end up with a better learning experience.

 

[BigBooper]

I've had that video in my queue waiting for the right mood, but initially I'm uncomfortable with that conclusion because where does that leave the people who do try, but can't concentrate during lectures? I can barely focus when someone is telling me something vs reading it myself. I'll try to come back after watching it all.

 

[Spaceman292]

I looked through the scientific papers as well. Checks out. There's little evidence supporting the widely popularized "learning styles" hypothesis which groups students into visual learners, auditory learners, reading learners, etc., and aims to give each group specialized instruction.

Combined approaches -- i.e. traditional instruction that utilizes textbooks, lectures, blackboards, media, and interactive exercises -- are the best way to learn for everyone.

I don't know either way, but the learning styles thing always sounded like bullshit to me

 

[Punished Miku]

When I was cramming my hardest for school, I had to basically do all of the above. For brute force memorization, I'd try reading, then highlighting, then writing it out in notes, then writing it in note cards, then training my recall ability over and over. Then get together with someone from class and verbally quiz, then quiz and write on a dry erase board. The goal was to practice actually recalling the information over and over like training a muscle. I also tried to link information to other memories, like linking study of a certain disease to someone that I knew that had it - so when I thought of that person, I'd have a link to other memories about the disease. Memories get triggered all the time by seemingly unrelated things like songs. They're little folders in your brain, and if you create multiple links to the folder then it can be retrieved more easily.

If you're not talking about brute force memorization, then really the only thing you're actually discussing is clear communication. Lecture, conversation, active learning, it doesn't really matter. The only thing that matters is that the communication is clear, and that it's being received by the listener. People can drift off in thought and lose focus, or need breaks timed for when their attention wanes. There's still tons of factors that will affect how you learn. Each person still has to customize it to what works for them.

 

[The Pleasure]

As a former teacher, I can definitely say that students take to different methods of instruction. There's no one size fits all approach, and traditional methods is definitely not the best approach. It's outdated and outmoded. We often forget how many of our fellow classmates struggled in school, when we were being taught the traditional way.

When I took ed classes for my master's, one of the best professors I have used a really creative discovery method of teaching. She essentially threw us into groups, with a bunch of manipulatives and paper on a table, and had us learn the math topic she was teaching through discovery. It's hard to explain, because in most cases, we started off the lesson completely lost and confused, but through some simple instructions, and random nudges, we'd finally arrive at the solution, and a deeper understanding of the topic. Through group study, and a diversified-but-largely-physical teaching style, she taught math to people of all different levels and intelligence.

The thing is, that method of teaching couldn't work for most topics in most subject areas. It has limited use. However, it did make it clear that there are huge benefits in non-traditional methods of teaching.

The best school I ever taught at was a montessori school. That's also fairly non-traditional, with a greater blend of individual and group learning. The kids were happier, and learned a lot better. I wasn't great at it, as I had traditional learning pretty deeply engrained in me at the time. But I did the best I could with it. I think there's room for flexibility in education. I don't think sticking to tradition is the right approach at all. I also don't like the idea of a school district enforcing any particular style of teaching on educators.

I think we need better teachers, and we get that by raising teacher salaries. Right now, you're getting people who look to teaching as a last resort, and then a bunch of liberal arts majors. For STEM, you need engineers and scientists who understand the subject matter, and can relay that information to students in creative and fun ways.

I think we also need to shrink class sizes. 30+ kids crammed into a classroom means more kids falling by the wayside. You can't give a struggling student the necessary added assistance, because there are just too many of them to keep close enough tabs on. You have to balance getting through the curriculum, while maintaining an orderly classroom. Time is at a premium in these cases, and crowded classrooms increase how much of that balance goes to maintaining order.

I think better teachers and smaller class sizes go well together, and you end up with a better learning experience.

Nobody is gonna read this. Even though it is correct and teaching is a gradient or fusion of style.

 

[Maiden Voyage]

As someone who learns visually,

Spoiler

 

[Pegasus Actual]

In my experience "I'm a visual learner" has always been code for "I am stupid and/or lazy"

 

[Deleted member 17706]

In my experience "I'm a visual learner" has always been code for "I am stupid and/or lazy"

This has always been my suspicion, although I don't want to attribute it entirely to laziness. Some people's brains just aren't wired for academic learning in general.

 

[Golgo 13]

Interesting findings. I think that you can find a learning/study style that works best for you - but to me nothing beats focused reading, then reflection (thinking about the material with the book closed), and then writing about what I just read in my own words. Lectures are good too because they break up the monotony of book-studying.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Actual teaching involves some sort of text book and teachers have a 30min-1 hr window to make an impact on students.

Some teachers don't give class only ask questions to students about their research and even unsolved mathematical problems from ancient times just to see if some random prodigy solves a near unsolvable problem within minutes. You basically have to have done the real studying in your free time. I've seen a few Ivy league classes and it seems that's the way at least a few professors give class just asking students to give the answers and class themselves.

 

[Punished Miku]

Some teachers don't give class only ask questions to students about their research and even unsolved mathematical problems from ancient times just to see if some random prodigy solves a near unsolvable problem within minutes. You basically have to have done the real studying in your free time. I've seen a few Ivy league classes and it seems that's the way at least a few professors give class just asking students to give the answers and class themselves.

I saw this once as well in some Ivy League classes ....

Spoiler

... on TV

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

I saw this once as well in some Ivy League classes ....

Spoiler

... on TV

I saw it on

Spoiler

recorded MOOCs ivy league free online education ton of courses available.

 

[Armorian]

I only learn things through dance.

 

[bender]

are the best way to learn for everyone.

Don't put me in your box, lady.

 

[farmerboy]

Depends on what are learning though?

I would think a trade has to be shown and practiced.

 

[Impotaku]

Strange, if i'm not a visual learner then how did i learn how to do electronics as i sure as hell didn't read textbooks or web articles or goto class for it. I learnt it all from watching youtube tutorials. People learn in different ways, i find i pick things up way faster if someone does show me something then i try to replicate it. Someone just telling me with no visual aid doesn't sink in as much neither does doing it from a book it's way slower.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Strange, if i'm not a visual learner then how did i learn how to do electronics as i sure as hell didn't read textbooks or web articles or goto class for it. I learnt it all from watching youtube tutorials. People learn in different ways, i find i pick things up way faster if someone does show me something then i try to replicate it. Someone just telling me with no visual aid doesn't sink in as much neither does doing it from a book it's way slower.

I learn mostly from the screen, learned multiple languages because I have the eyes of causality, I can see how one ad leads to another one event leads to another, how synchronicity actually has actual causal relation, how changing from one series or book to another continues logically and causally, the order behind randomness, the intimate relation between determinism and randomness, darkness and light, opposites, the finite and the infinite, fractals, mathematical monsters, superdeterminism in the world. The pain of existence a puppet bound by strings.

 

[Quasicat]

I think we also need to shrink class sizes. 30+ kids crammed into a classroom means more kids falling by the wayside. You can't give a struggling student the necessary added assistance, because there are just too many of them to keep close enough tabs on. You have to balance getting through the curriculum, while maintaining an orderly classroom. Time is at a premium in these cases, and crowded classrooms increase how much of that balance goes to maintaining order.

I think better teachers and smaller class sizes go well together, and you end up with a better learning experience.

I definitely agree with all that you said. Specifically about class size, before the pandemic, it was normal to have 35 to 40 students in my 8th grade, American History class. Last year, we were maxed out at 20 students, but they have already told us to expect pre-pandemic numbers this upcoming school year. That may explain why we lost almost half of our staff this year to leaving the profession.

 

[Porcile]

I learn mostly from the screen, learned multiple languages because I have the eyes of causality, I can see how one ad leads to another one event leads to another, how synchronicity actually has actual causal relation, how changing from one series or book to another continues logically and causally, the order behind randomness, the intimate relation between determinism and randomness, darkness and light, opposites, the finite and the infinite, fractals, mathematical monsters, superdeterminism in the world. The pain of existence a puppet bound by strings.

What language is this?

 

[tsumake]

I find this topic really interesting. In my early years in college, I remember reading articles doubting the effectiveness (and existence) of learning styles. Since then, I didn’t think of myself as an auditory listener. Rather, I immersed myself into lessons through different approaches. Worked wonders for me.

I’m in the camp that believes that the engagement of the learner is the biggest factor of learning. He says something about actively thinking of the material, which makes someone learn best, and I agree with that.

Multiple learning styles/intelligences are still a staple in education circles. It’s a way to make a teacher’s job easier….

Developing active skills means consciously engaging your senses so that you can evaluate something. A wine taster actively engages his/her sense of taste to evaluate a wine, for example. You can develop those skills in a student. It just requires work.

In my experience, a student-centered approach is the best. It’s a riff on Socrates active class participation. You have the students “discover” the answer rather than tell them.

You don’t want this:

 

[tsumake]

What language is this?

It’s a satire on the hubris of the so-called autodidact.

 

[dave_d]

Multiple learning styles/intelligences are still a staple in education circles. It’s a way to make a teacher’s job easier….

Developing active skills means consciously engaging your senses so that you can evaluate something. A wine taster actively engages his/her sense of taste to evaluate a wine, for example. You can develop those skills in a student. It just requires work.

In my experience, a student-centered approach is the best. It’s a riff on Socrates active class participation. You have the students “discover” the answer rather than tell them.

You don’t want this:

Did someone say Socrates?

 

[nush]

I only learn things through dance.

 

[The Pleasure]

As someone who learns visually,

Spoiler

Skips too many frames. Did Arcsys works make this gif?

 

[jonnyp]

I only learn things through dance.

 

[Pagusas]

In other words, the best type of teaching is one that utilizes all mediums! Who would have thought?

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

I think Plato got best name reservations, with platonic realm, and platonic relations being atop the hierarchy of things.







BTW TRUTH eternalism block time, believed by Einstein who thought Tesla smarter, blockchain of moments in time. TRUTH MATHEMATICS underlying naturally occurring simulation, like naturally occurring nuclear reactor think in africa.

Naturally Occurring Nuclear Fission Reactors

large.stanford.edu

 

[Soltype]

Is this a US only study? The US education system is a mess, but not entirely to the fault of the government, American children are lazy.

 

[tsumake]

Did someone say Socrates?

 

[SuperBabyMethod]

As a former teacher, I can definitely say that students take to different methods of instruction. There's no one size fits all approach, and traditional methods is definitely not the best approach. It's outdated and outmoded. We often forget how many of our fellow classmates struggled in school, when we were being taught the traditional way.

When I took ed classes for my master's, one of the best professors I have used a really creative discovery method of teaching. She essentially threw us into groups, with a bunch of manipulatives and paper on a table, and had us learn the math topic she was teaching through discovery. It's hard to explain, because in most cases, we started off the lesson completely lost and confused, but through some simple instructions, and random nudges, we'd finally arrive at the solution, and a deeper understanding of the topic. Through group study, and a diversified-but-largely-physical teaching style, she taught math to people of all different levels and intelligence.

The thing is, that method of teaching couldn't work for most topics in most subject areas. It has limited use. However, it did make it clear that there are huge benefits in non-traditional methods of teaching.

The best school I ever taught at was a montessori school. That's also fairly non-traditional, with a greater blend of individual and group learning. The kids were happier, and learned a lot better. I wasn't great at it, as I had traditional learning pretty deeply engrained in me at the time. But I did the best I could with it. I think there's room for flexibility in education. I don't think sticking to tradition is the right approach at all. I also don't like the idea of a school district enforcing any particular style of teaching on educators.

I think we need better teachers, and we get that by raising teacher salaries. Right now, you're getting people who look to teaching as a last resort, and then a bunch of liberal arts majors. For STEM, you need engineers and scientists who understand the subject matter, and can relay that information to students in creative and fun ways.

I think we also need to shrink class sizes. 30+ kids crammed into a classroom means more kids falling by the wayside. You can't give a struggling student the necessary added assistance, because there are just too many of them to keep close enough tabs on. You have to balance getting through the curriculum, while maintaining an orderly classroom. Time is at a premium in these cases, and crowded classrooms increase how much of that balance goes to maintaining order.

I think better teachers and smaller class sizes go well together, and you end up with a better learning experience.

Great post. As a current teacher, the current trend (at least in my school) is to move away from traditional teaching methods and more into what is known as “student-centered learning” - meaning, the students “run” the classroom in a way that they have the agency to learn what they want, work in groups to teach each other, and a “be their own boss” in approaching their education; the teachers role would be designated to being a facilitator, checking, evaluating and pushing a student in the right direction. While I think traditional methods still have a lot of use, it is also why so many students are disincentive to school and education in general (this extends to the public perception of education that you see so much online and elsewhere).

Like you, I’ve also been ingrained in a traditional Teaching method - both as a student and as I made my way through college, so it’s also kind of difficult to grasp and conduct a classroom like this (among the common myriad of classroom problems such as misbehavior). Do I think students would learn better like this? Yes; we know that children are born curious and learn at faster pace than adults do, so giving them a lot more flexibility in what they want (and how) to learn is highly beneficial.

However, a few massive challenges come with this approach: students who lack a good work ethic and those who lack fundamental skills to even begin doing things on their own (ie, how can you do research and do a presentation if the student doesn’t know how to read or is computer illiterate?). Those who lack skills need traditional and more hands on teaching; someone needs to teach them those skills before they venture off on their own.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

People gravitate to different styles.

Work in an office. The exact same data and analysis can be shown in spreadsheets or fancy charts.

Some people like me prefer tons of numbers and excel tabs. Some people's eyes glaze over and will only understand it if you make simple bar charts. Make charts too complicated (dual axis, dual format charts) and that is even too much. Some people need very basic tables and visuals.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Great post. As a current teacher, the current trend (at least in my school) is to move away from traditional teaching methods and more into what is known as “student-centered learning” - meaning, the students “run” the classroom in a way that they have the agency to learn what they want, work in groups to teach each other, and a “be their own boss” in approaching their education; the teachers role would be designated to being a facilitator, checking, evaluating and pushing a student in the right direction. While I think traditional methods still have a lot of use, it is also why so many students are disincentive to school and education in general (this extends to the public perception of education that you see so much online and elsewhere).

Like you, I’ve also been ingrained in a traditional Teaching method - both as a student and as I made my way through college, so it’s also kind of difficult to grasp and conduct a classroom like this (among the common myriad of classroom problems such as misbehavior). Do I think students would learn better like this? Yes; we know that children are born curious and learn at faster pace than adults do, so giving them a lot more flexibility in what they want (and how) to learn is highly beneficial.

However, a few massive challenges come with this approach: students who lack a good work ethic and those who lack fundamental skills to even begin doing things on their own (ie, how can you do research and do a presentation if the student doesn’t know how to read or is computer illiterate?). Those who lack skills need traditional and more hands on teaching; someone needs to teach them those skills before they venture off on their own.

I don't like that I work alone, group work stresses me, oral presentation worse than rape in my book, high function autism with avolition and automatic obedience.

Automatic Obedience definition | Psychology Glossary | AlleyDog.com

Psychology definition for Automatic Obedience in normal everyday language, edited by psychologists, professors and leading students. Help us get better.

www.alleydog.com

 

[tsumake]

Great post. As a current teacher, the current trend (at least in my school) is to move away from traditional teaching methods and more into what is known as “student-centered learning” - meaning, the students “run” the classroom in a way that they have the agency to learn what they want, work in groups to teach each other, and a “be their own boss” in approaching their education; the teachers role would be designated to being a facilitator, checking, evaluating and pushing a student in the right direction. While I think traditional methods still have a lot of use, it is also why so many students are disincentive to school and education in general (this extends to the public perception of education that you see so much online and elsewhere).

Like you, I’ve also been ingrained in a traditional Teaching method - both as a student and as I made my way through college, so it’s also kind of difficult to grasp and conduct a classroom like this (among the common myriad of classroom problems such as misbehavior). Do I think students would learn better like this? Yes; we know that children are born curious and learn at faster pace than adults do, so giving them a lot more flexibility in what they want (and how) to learn is highly beneficial.

However, a few massive challenges come with this approach: students who lack a good work ethic and those who lack fundamental skills to even begin doing things on their own (ie, how can you do research and do a presentation if the student doesn’t know how to read or is computer illiterate?). Those who lack skills need traditional and more hands on teaching; someone needs to teach them those skills before they venture off on their own.

You can manage a class with students of varying abilities and interest levels. One way to deal with low engaging students is to call on them and “hand them the mic.” If they still don’t participate, move on and monitor the student. You get your more engaged students to explain concepts in class and encourage them to help other students.

Don’t fall in love with self-fellating “progressive” ideas floating the edusphere. Yes, the traditional method has flaws but we should also care about overall learning goals and learning outcomes. There’s nothing more infuriating than a teacher who doesn’t teach.

As far as teacher’s salaries, yes they should be high - if you’re a good teacher.

 

[Derekloffin]

Is this a US only study? The US education system is a mess, but not entirely to the fault of the government, American children are lazy.

It was multiple studies:
References: Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological science in the public interest, 9(3), 105-119. — https://ve42.co/Pashler2008 Willingham, D. T., Hughes, E. M., & Dobolyi, D. G. (2015). The scientific status of learning styles theories. Teaching of Psychology, 42(3), 266-271. — https://ve42.co/Willingham Massa, L. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2006). Testing the ATI hypothesis: Should multimedia instruction accommodate verbalizer-visualizer cognitive style?. Learning and Individual Differences, 16(4), 321-335. — https://ve42.co/Massa2006 Riener, C., & Willingham, D. (2010). The myth of learning styles. Change: The magazine of higher learning, 42(5), 32-35.— https://ve42.co/Riener2010 Husmann, P. R., & O'Loughlin, V. D. (2019). Another nail in the coffin for learning styles? Disparities among undergraduate anatomy students’ study strategies, class performance, and reported VARK learning styles. Anatomical sciences education, 12(1), 6-19. — https://ve42.co/Husmann2019 Snider, V. E., & Roehl, R. (2007). Teachers’ beliefs about pedagogy and related issues. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 873–886. doi:10.1002/pits.20272 — https://ve42.co/Snider2007 Fleming, N., & Baume, D. (2006). Learning Styles Again: VARKing up the right tree!. Educational developments, 7(4), 4. — https://ve42.co/Fleming2006 Rogowsky, B. A., Calhoun, B. M., & Tallal, P. (2015). Matching learning style to instructional method: Effects on comprehension. Journal of educational psychology, 107(1), 64. — https://ve42.co/Rogowskyetal Coffield, Frank; Moseley, David; Hall, Elaine; Ecclestone, Kathryn (2004). — https://ve42.co/Coffield2004 Furey, W. (2020). THE STUBBORN MYTH OF LEARNING STYLES. Education Next, 20(3), 8-13. — https://ve42.co/Furey2020 Dunn, R., Beaudry, J. S., & Klavas, A. (2002). Survey of research on learning styles. California Journal of Science Education II (2). — https://ve42.co/Dunn2002

 

[Halo is Back]

Distributive learning is the best type of learning for virtually anyone.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

You can manage a class with students of varying abilities and interest levels. One way to deal with low engaging students is to call on them and “hand them the mic.” If they still don’t participate, move on and monitor the student. You get your more engaged students to explain concepts in class and encourage them to help other students.

Don’t fall in love with self-fellating “progressive” ideas floating the edusphere. Yes, the traditional method has flaws but we should also care about overall learning goals and learning outcomes. There’s nothing more infuriating than a teacher who doesn’t teach.

As far as teacher’s salaries, yes they should be high - if you’re a good teacher.

I'm no teacher, but have my challenges communicating financials to people at the office. If anyone out there thinks the typical office guy working in sales and marketing are A+ in business acumen, you are dead wrong.

Half of them are idiots when it comes to numbers and need to be spoon fed numbers. They'll never learn and are stubborn not to bother even trying. Not the end of the world as companies have dedicated finance departments to handle it.

Many of them cant even read a basic PL statement, when you'd think all business office guys should at least know the basics. They don't.

I can present in a room of 30 people, but can only dumb it down so much. The range of skills in the audience varies so much, I'd have to present Business 101 each time for the first hour every time before getting into it, but cant do that.

Got to cut the cord and go in with a "middle of the road" approach, and if any beginners are struggling, they got to ask Q&A at the end or ask me for one on one explanations later.

I cant fathom how all you teachers can control a room when you got kids who dont give a shit or struggle with the basics on one side and A+ keeners who care and want to breeze to the next topic on the other. I'd go nuts.

 

[Halo is Back]

As a former teacher, I can definitely say that students take to different methods of instruction. There's no one size fits all approach, and traditional methods is definitely not the best approach. It's outdated and outmoded. We often forget how many of our fellow classmates struggled in school, when we were being taught the traditional way.

When I took ed classes for my master's, one of the best professors I have used a really creative discovery method of teaching. She essentially threw us into groups, with a bunch of manipulatives and paper on a table, and had us learn the math topic she was teaching through discovery. It's hard to explain, because in most cases, we started off the lesson completely lost and confused, but through some simple instructions, and random nudges, we'd finally arrive at the solution, and a deeper understanding of the topic. Through group study, and a diversified-but-largely-physical teaching style, she taught math to people of all different levels and intelligence.

The thing is, that method of teaching couldn't work for most topics in most subject areas. It has limited use. However, it did make it clear that there are huge benefits in non-traditional methods of teaching.

The best school I ever taught at was a montessori school. That's also fairly non-traditional, with a greater blend of individual and group learning. The kids were happier, and learned a lot better. I wasn't great at it, as I had traditional learning pretty deeply engrained in me at the time. But I did the best I could with it. I think there's room for flexibility in education. I don't think sticking to tradition is the right approach at all. I also don't like the idea of a school district enforcing any particular style of teaching on educators.

I think we need better teachers, and we get that by raising teacher salaries. Right now, you're getting people who look to teaching as a last resort, and then a bunch of liberal arts majors. For STEM, you need engineers and scientists who understand the subject matter, and can relay that information to students in creative and fun ways.

I think we also need to shrink class sizes. 30+ kids crammed into a classroom means more kids falling by the wayside. You can't give a struggling student the necessary added assistance, because there are just too many of them to keep close enough tabs on. You have to balance getting through the curriculum, while maintaining an orderly classroom. Time is at a premium in these cases, and crowded classrooms increase how much of that balance goes to maintaining order.

I think better teachers and smaller class sizes go well together, and you end up with a better learning experience.

I agree and disagree with this statement. I think this is more applicable to younger children but when you get into high school and college, at least half of the responsibility to engage with the teacher is on the student too. I took classes In college with 200+ students. I was struggling quite a bit in my Behavioral Statistics course, but I made it my mission to succeed in that class. Almost every single day I would meet with my professor right after to ask any remaining questions I had. There were always 15 mins available before the next class walked in, so I made sure to take advantage of that time.

 

[tsumake]

I'm no teacher, but have my challenges communicating financials to people at the office. If anyone out there thinks the typical office guy working in sales and marketing are A+ in business acumen, you are dead wrong.

Half of them are idiots when it comes to numbers and need to be spoon fed numbers. They'll never learn and are stubborn not to bother even trying. Not the end of the world as companies have dedicated finance departments to handle it.

Many of them cant even read a basic PL statement, when you'd think all business office guys should at least know the basics. They don't.

I can present in a room of 30 people, but can only dumb it down so much. The range of skills in the audience varies so much, I'd have to present Business 101 each time for the first hour every time before getting into it, but cant do that.

Got to cut the cord and go in with a "middle of the road" approach, and if any beginners are struggling, they got to ask Q&A at the end or ask me for one on one explanations later.

I cant fathom how all you teachers can control a room when you got kids who dont give a shit or struggle with the basics on one side and A+ keeners who care and want to breeze to the next topic on the other. I'd go nuts.

Teaching WELL is hard.

 

[Virt McPolygon]

Anyone that tries to tell me Netflix shows are amazing, I like to remind them of The OA

 

[niveaformen]

Who is this myth perpetuated by? Is it actually the teachers themselves? I think thought this is was one of those misconceptions largely for anyone outside of education, but it seems most teachers believe this. With that said, any teacher worth their weight in pedagogical knowledge and learning theory should know this. Yeah, multi sensory instruction is best. There's still that moderating component of learning styles to engagement which is important for learning.

 

[Soodanim]

The last time I encountered this idea was in college. From what I remember it was presented as being preferences - while it may be useful to know which you find best, the ideal approach is a variety of methods. Having said that, it was nearly half my life ago and I may be conflating that with my opinion of it.

One thing I can say is that I don’t have a strong imagination (going back to the old aphantasia thread), so being told something doesn’t work half as well as me seeing it (either by reading or putting pen to paper myself). I don’t know if that applies to everyone (haven’t watched the video yet).

 

[jufonuk]

Text books can be very efficient, but adhd bro!

Same. So is my son

I find it easier to learn by doing.

 

[bitbydeath]

In my experience "I'm a visual learner" has always been code for "I am stupid and/or lazy"

Wouldn’t that statement also be acknowledging that visual learning is easier?

 

[GeorgPrime]

I only learn things through dance.

I only learn things by looking at them or doing it myself

 

[Skyfox]

*Slow clap*

Instead of offering a combination, this video will just be misused. We'll get less imagery and more text in education.

Congrats on being technically correct while grabbing attention at the cost of wider adoption of visual elements in education.