Good article. Maybe in our lifetime things like "multiple intelligences" will be debunked to the point of falling completely out of favor with the public, and new unsupported theories will be given a harder look before whole sale (strange forum bug won't let me type that word without the space) acceptance. Other possible should-be-discredited ideas-- if I had to guess, based on my layperson's prior readings-- include overexcitabilities, left-brain/right-brain learning, etc.
On the other hand, the article is poorly written in some ways. I can see how it could mislead someone into thinking that students don't have any differences in the way they learn, ever, even in the case of some learning disabilities. I think that the article could have done a better job of defining its use of "learning style".
EDIT: I guess the linked article abstract defines things well enough. It also notes that "given the lack of methodologically sound studies of learning styles, it would be an error to conclude that all possible versions of learning styles have been tested and found wanting; many have simply not been tested at all".
Last edited by Iucounu; 09/07/10 06:06 AM.
