This is a piece I wrote for the IPS Education Committee’s quarterly column (in the Sept 2021 edition). In my regular column I discuss how astronomy educators can debunk astronomy myths, but here I do my best to debunk three of the most pervasive and damaging Education Myths. I hope you enjoy it!
Debunking Education Myths
Education research is as prone to misconceptions and false narratives as astronomy. Everyone has personal experience of thinking and learning; perhaps this is why myths that ‘sound right’ are so easily accepted. Fortunately, academic researchers have gathered enough experimental data to help us sort at least some of these myths from reality.
There are a few well-worn education myths that are especially persistent, despite having been debunked by psychologists some years ago. Here are my Top Three Education Myths.
MYTH 1: People learn best in their preferred Learning Style
A learning style is a way of receiving information for learning. Lists of learning styles vary, but usually include visual, auditory and kinaesthetic.
This myth from the 1990s suggests that people learn best when material is provided through their preferred learning style. If you believe this, you might think that teachers must present information in every different style to avoid leaving any learner behind. Or (worse), that children should be grouped by preferred style and given different activities.
In reality, everyone learns through multiple learning styles. Although most people claim a preferred learning style, studies have repeatedly shown that presenting material in the learner’s favoured style does not improve learning outcomes (Pashler, 2018).
The Learning Styles myth is very successful partly because it is pushed by companies selling associated training and resources. This is part of the broader pseudo-scientific ‘personality test’ industry (Chen, 2018) - effectively a modern form of astrology.
Don’t: Feel compelled to use learning styles that don’t suit the material.
Do: Use a natural mix of styles, choosing the style(s) most appropriate for each individual concept.
MYTH 2: The type of learning activity determines how much is remembered
This fantastically sticky edu-myth has been tracked all the way back to the 1850s (Letrud, 2018). At some point it was merged with an unrelated academic diagram to create a meme which has successfully wheedled its way into teacher training programs and other apparently authoritative contexts. It is usually presented with fake academic references.
The myth is presented as a pyramid diagram (as in Figure 1). Each level is labelled with a way of learning (e.g.. lecture, discussion). Each of these is given a percentage claiming to show how much of the taught material will be remembered. The diagram is often mis-attributed to Edgar Dale.
Red flags should immediately be raised by the fact that each percentage is a multiple of 10%. Experimental data is never so tidy! Recent retention studies trying to test its claims have shown no basis for the numbers at all. As well as the made-up figures, this model contradicts current understanding of how learning occurs. It’s difficult even to study this topic as retention varies so much between individuals, contexts and through time.
Don’t: Be put off using activity types that are undervalued by this false and misleading diagram.
Do: Use a mixture of activities as best suited to the topic and to the prior knowledge of the learners.
Figure 1: Myth 2 is often presented as the “Pyramid of Learning”, and falsely linked to Edgar Dale.
MYTH 3: Learners are good judges of their own learning
Planetarians are often asked to provide information that would require a longitudinal research study using sophisticated psychological/sociological methods. Have you ever asked your audience something like “how much did you learn?”. I have - many times! But unfortunately, people are terrible judges of their own learning.
Reasons for errors of judgement include:
1. They have become very familiar with the material, but have not learned how to recall it.
2. Practicing recall made them aware they can’t remember everything they expected to. This made them feel they learned less well than they otherwise would have reported.
3. They struggled or were confused during the activity, and so think they did badly. (In fact these feelings can be markers of effective learning.)
4. They believe they understood it all, because they did not get the chance to identify their misunderstandings.
There is a lovely study related to the first two items in this list. Learners were asked how well they thought they would do in a test, and this was compared to their subsequent performance. One group of learners had re-read the test material repeatedly. The other group had read it just once, using the rest of the time to practice recalling it. Which group do you think was most confident? Which group do you think did best on the test? (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006)
This myth also helps feed Myth 1 (Learning Styles); students may report that they are more confident about material learned in their preferred style, despite showing no benefit in testing (Knoll, 2017).
Don’t: Adapt your practice in response to self-reported assessments of learning.
Do: Ask learners to demonstrate recall/use of new learnings. You could ask them to point to predict where an object should be, or to identify something in the dome. Or give them quick, low-stakes quizzes designed to catch misconceptions. Be sure to involve everyone, not just those confident enough to put their hands up.
Simple Fixes
Education myths are often attractive because they offer a simple approach. But education is a complex activity, and so it’s always worth being cautious of anything that looks like a quick fix. That said, if you do want a single, simple phrase to help guide your practice, you could do a lot worse than choose Daniel Willingham’s “Memory is the Residue of Thought”.
This phrase reminds us that, however we choose to present a topic, the most important steps to learning will happen within the learner’s mind. The more the learner thinks about or uses a concept, the more likely they are to remember it. So consider: are you encouraging your audience to turn the new information around in their mind, to use it in new ways, and to link it to their prior knowledge? Or is it just going in one ear and out the other?
Save wasted time and energy by casting off debunked educational myths, to allow you to focus your energies on more-effective strategies to help your audience learn.
References
Chen, A. (2018). How Accurate are Personality Tests. Scientific American, 10 October 2018, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-accurate-are-personality-tests/
Khazan, O. (11 April 2018). The Myth of ‘Learning Styles’, The Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-myth-of-learning-styles/557687/
Letrud, Kåre, and Sigbjørn Hernes (2018). Excavating the Origin of the Learning Pyramid Myth. Cogent Education 5 (1): 1–17.
Knoll et al. (2017). Learning style, judgements of learning, and learning of verbal and visual information. Br J Psychol 108(3):544-563.
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9, 105–119.
Roediger HL, Karpicke JD. (2006). Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention. Psychological Science. 17(3):249-255.