Learning styles: what the evidence actually says
"He's a visual learner." "She learns best kinaesthetically." The idea is everywhere, from teacher training to parent evenings. It is also one of the most tested ideas in education, and the tests have not supported it. Here is what the research found, and what to do instead.
The answer in 60 seconds
- The claim
- Each child has a style (often visual, auditory or kinaesthetic) and learns better when teaching matches it.
- The evidence
- No adequate evidence that matching teaching to a style improves learning. The EEF Toolkit shows no impact figure because high-quality studies are so few.
- The risk
- Labelling children may limit them and give an excuse for not succeeding, especially in primary school.
- Instead
- Match the method to the content, not the child: show maps visually, teach sounds by listening, and combine words with pictures for everyone.
What learning styles are
There are dozens of learning-style models. The best known in schools is VAK or VARK: visual, auditory (or aural), read/write and kinaesthetic. A child fills in a questionnaire about preferences, gets a label, and teachers are told to plan activities for each style.
The key claim is called the meshing hypothesis: that a visual learner taught visually will learn more than if taught another way, and an auditory learner the opposite. That is the part that has been tested.
What the evidence says
In 2008, four cognitive psychologists (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer and Bjork) reviewed the research for Psychological Science in the Public Interest. They set out what a fair test would look like: identify learners' styles, randomly teach them in a matching or non-matching way, then give everyone the same test. Very few studies used that design, and several that did found results that contradicted the meshing idea. They concluded there was no adequate evidence base to justify using learning-styles assessments in general education.
The Education Endowment Foundation's Teaching and Learning Toolkit reaches a similar view today. It rates learning styles as unclear impact, based on insufficient evidence, because the number of high-quality studies is extremely low. It also says learners are very unlikely to have a single learning style.
To be fair to the idea: the reviewers noted that many style models have simply never been properly tested, so the research does not prove every version wrong. But after decades of popularity, the lack of good supporting evidence is itself telling.
Can it do harm?
The EEF warns that restricting pupils to activities matched to their reported preferences may damage their progress, and that labelling pupils is likely to undermine their belief that they can succeed through effort. It singles out younger children, whose preferences are still very flexible. A child told "you're not a reading learner" has been given a reason to give up on reading.
What is true
- People do have preferences. They are real, but liking a way of learning is not the same as learning better that way.
- Variety helps engagement. Changing activity keeps attention, for every child.
- Words plus pictures often help everyone. Combining a clear diagram with spoken explanation (sometimes called dual coding) is one of the areas the EEF's cognitive science review looked at.
- Some content has a best form. Pronunciation needs listening. A map needs to be seen. Handwriting needs doing.
- Individual needs are real, such as dyslexia, hearing or visual impairment, EAL. These need specific support, not a style label.
What to do instead
- Choose the representation that suits the content.
- Use pictures, gestures and objects with new words, for everyone.
- Check understanding often and adjust to what children show you.
- Teach children how to learn: plan, monitor, review. The EEF rates metacognition and self-regulation at +8 months.
- Use retrieval practice and spacing so learning lasts.
Five-question quiz: myth or evidence?
Myth or supported by evidence?
Try it tomorrow: one vocabulary lesson for everyone (30 minutes)
Instead of three activities for three "styles", every child gets the same rich mix. Topic: weather words, A1.
| Minutes | Step | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 0 to 8 | Show a picture for each word (sunny, rainy, windy, cloudy, snowy), say it, class repeats with a gesture. | Picture plus word plus sound: dual coding for all. |
| 8 to 14 | Teacher says a word, class does the gesture; then gesture only, class says the word. | Retrieval in both directions. |
| 14 to 22 | Pairs: draw today's weather and write two sentences: "It is ___. It is not ___." | Producing language, not only recognising it. |
| 22 to 30 | Without pictures, children write as many weather words as they can remember. Check and tick. | Low-stakes retrieval. Repeat the quiz next lesson. |
Frequently asked questions
Are learning styles real?
People have preferences, but there is no adequate evidence that teaching matched to a preferred style improves learning.
What does the EEF say about learning styles?
The EEF Toolkit rates learning styles as unclear impact with insufficient evidence, and warns that labelling pupils can harm their progress and motivation.
What is the meshing hypothesis?
The idea that learners do better when teaching matches their style. Pashler and colleagues (2008) found no adequate evidence for it.
Is VARK the same as learning styles?
VARK is one popular learning-styles model (visual, aural, read/write, kinaesthetic). The same lack of evidence for matching applies.
Should I stop using pictures and movement then?
No. Pictures, gestures and movement help all children learn new words. Just use them for everyone, not for a labelled group.
Evidence-informed English, ready to teach
Our free Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 programmes use pictures, talk and review for every child. Litlings adds a class tracker, free for up to 40 pupils.
Try Litlings freeRelated
- Learning styles (EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit)
- Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer and Bjork, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2008; PubMed record)
- Cognitive science approaches in the classroom (EEF, 2021)
- Metacognition and self-regulation (EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit)