[Corence]

Second, we can bring what is known as differentiated education — based on the idea that students master skills in different ways and at different speeds — to every student in the country. A 2013 study by the National Institutes of Health found that nearly 40 percent of medical students held a strong preference for one mode of learning: Some were listeners; others were visual learners; still others learned best by doing.

This study was a 100 person survey with no experimental evidence to back up people's beliefs. I've been working with educators for a while, and they've said that "learning styles" are just a myth with no solid evidence. All this survey says is that people think they learn best via one method, but people are notoriously bad at knowing what is an effective way of learning. In surveys people overvalue the "intensity" of a learning experience [1], which makes them think things like a 3-week bootcamp are more effective, when really spaced repetition is a better use of time.

At least in the US, there are many easier ways we could improve our education methods before resorting to ML-driven customization.

[1] http://www.pnas.org/content/114/37/9854.full

[TheLegace]

I don't really have experimental data to back this up. But after struggling for my entire life until recently with learning this is the experience I have had studying for my last course(after a decade of struggling to study).

I use to write everything down, it was the only way to retain whatever little information that I was capable of retaining. I never had enough confidence to NOT write everything. Realizing that all my abilities were impaired because of improper cognitive development. I decided to start from scratch, having nothing developed and picking one area that I was suited to. I have been practicing reciting rap lyrics of Eminem and Nas(not really for any reason, it was just fun). What I realized is that now my ability to recall information was significantly improved at least from a verbal learning style perspective. And it only took a few months develop. While studying for my final I went back to my old habits of writing every single detail down and realizing I will never have enough time to write it all down. So I started reciting knowledge the same way I would recite rap lyrics and I retained EVERYTHING. I have never studied so little, yet I aced my exam got an A in the course and was proud.

Moral of the story is that people are different, and while most people may learn from one method, it doesn't mean they will have that capability developed at the time they need it. So they have to learn to adapt with what is available to them.

edit: I will add that again poverty is the source of all this. My parents grew up in severe poverty and never were able to develop these skills properly and I had to suffer because of that.

[unclebucknasty]

Mind if I ask what was responsible for your "improper cognitive development"?

[dsfyu404ed]

>I've been working with educators for a while, and they've said that "learning styles" are just a myth with no solid evidence

I've worked with educators too. They are and they aren't it depends on the level and time period you're taking. At the individual level how a math problem (for example) is presented can affect how quickly a student grasps the concept. When you're taking an entire school and more than a decade of schooling the effects of presentation aren't all that meaningful because people do the best job retaining the knowledge they use frequently.

[gowld]

> "learning styles" are just a myth with no solid evidence.

> when really spaced repetition is a better use of time.

So, which is it?

[Kalium]

I believe the comment you are responding to would say "both".

The learning styles to which they refer is the notion that different people learn better through visual or audio or hands-on experience. Spaced repetition versus intensive study is a different question, one of practice and time use, that doesn't address the question or value of "style".

At least, that's how I understand it. As a casual interpreter of someone else's comment, I could of course be wildly wrong.