Campus

Gainesville

Publication date

2016

Publisher

Journal of Educational Sciences & Psychology

Keywords

learning styles; dual coding; cognition; visual; auditory; interaction effect; retention

Abstract

This paper examines the research evidence behind two alternate and mutually exclusive learning models- learning styles and dual coding. The most common incarnation of each model is based on learning modalities, and each makes predictions about how learners process auditory and visual stimuli. Learning styles have found wide acceptance in public perception and throughout education at all levels, yet the majority of empirical research suggests that the model is not accurate and that learning styles instruction has no effect on student learning. Dual coding is more strongly supported by empirical research yet less well known and less commonly used in practice. The analysis examines evidence from a wide variety of sources, including experimental studies, correlational research, teacher-education texts, and neuroimaging studies. The findings reveal that dual coding is likely to be the more accurate model and that it offers more potential for both research and in practical application.

Author Biography

Josh Cuevas is a professor and educational psychologist at the University of North Georgia.

Share

COinS
 

An analysis of current evidence supporting two alternate learning models: Learning styles and dual coding.

This paper examines the research evidence behind two alternate and mutually exclusive learning models- learning styles and dual coding. The most common incarnation of each model is based on learning modalities, and each makes predictions about how learners process auditory and visual stimuli. Learning styles have found wide acceptance in public perception and throughout education at all levels, yet the majority of empirical research suggests that the model is not accurate and that learning styles instruction has no effect on student learning. Dual coding is more strongly supported by empirical research yet less well known and less commonly used in practice. The analysis examines evidence from a wide variety of sources, including experimental studies, correlational research, teacher-education texts, and neuroimaging studies. The findings reveal that dual coding is likely to be the more accurate model and that it offers more potential for both research and in practical application.