I was a teacher for 10 years & I went through college classes explaining Learning Styles in detail. I attended many of Professional Development Days explaining why we needed to “Differentiate” our instruction. Diversify our teaching methods so you could accommodate the Learning Styles of every student. I still remember filling out lesson plans explaining how I’d accommodate every “Learning Style”. It seemed like a completely logical idea & I never once gave it a second thought, until I went down a neuroscience rabbit hole. I learned quite a bit about how the brain actually learns.
Let’s take a dive into Learning Styles & coaching (specifically baseball). What are Learning Styles? What research exists about it & what does the research reveal? Is it even applicable outside of a classroom? How does the brain actually learn? I’ve shared my opinion about this topic several times & I will again in the conclusion of this post. However, there are always people who are so entrenched in an idea they are unwilling to accept new information. Their individual experience is often blindly associated to how everyone else experiences learning. So let’s rethink Learning Styles through a fresh lens.
What are Learning Styles?
Clearly defined Learning Styles are the “different ways individuals prefer to process, understand, & retain information.” Under the traditional VARK Model there were four Learning Styles:
- Visual- These learners prefer to learn through visual reprensentations such as charts, graphs, outlines, visual aides, an PowerPoint Presentations.
- Auditory- These learners prefer to learn through listening via lectures, recordings, or discussions.
- Reading/Writing- These learners prefer written materials such as text books, notes, & lists.
- Kinesthetic- These learners prefer hands-on experiences, physical activity, & real-life examples.
Now that it’s been clearly defined, what research exists about it? Here’s a quick rundown:
| Title | Authors | Key Points |
|---|---|---|
| Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence | Harold Pashler, Mark McDaniel, Doug Rohrer, Robert Bjork (2008) | Widely cited critical review. Concludes there is no adequate evidence to justify educational interventions based on learning styles. Tests of the “meshing hypothesis” fail to show improved outcomes when instruction matches preferred style. |
| The Learning Styles Myth is Thriving in Higher Education | Philip M. Newton (2015) | Examines belief persistence in learning styles despite contradictory evidence. Finds that over 90% of educators surveyed believed in learning styles, highlighting a disconnect between belief and evidence. |
| Do Learners Really Know Best? Urban Legends in Education | Paul A. Kirschner & Jeroen J.G. van Merriënboer (2013) | Critiques learning styles as an “urban legend.” Argues that teaching to preferred styles lacks empirical support and misleads educators. Emphasizes the need to focus on cognitive load and evidence-based strategies. |
| The Myth of Learning Styles | Cedar Riener & Daniel Willingham (2010) | Argues that while individuals have preferences, there’s no scientific evidence that teaching tailored to those preferences improves learning. Instead, instructional content should determine mode of delivery. |
| Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions Among Teachers | Sanne Dekker, Nikki Lee, Paul Howard-Jones, and Jelle Jolles (2012) | Surveys over 200 educators and finds that more than 90% believe in learning styles despite scientific rebuttals. Labels learning styles a “neuromyth” and warns of its educational consequences. |
What I found most interesting is how prevelant the belief is in learning styles, even in the face of how much evidence exists against it. What seemed liked the most logical explanation was it’s intuitive appeal. Like I said earlier, it seems like a highly plausible & logical idea at face value. It’s also easy to use anecdotal evidence, meaning your own lived experience. Declaring, “I’m a visual learning” & assuming everyone else has a preference as well. Finally, there’s a financial incentive from companies who create curriculum, trainings, & materials to further propogate the idea.
How Does The Brain Prefer To Learn?
Let’s first look at preferences. I think one of the biggest fallacies of Learning Styles is the idea that if a learner is let’s say a visual learner, then all future learning should take place visually. Why is this flawed? Preferences are not a fixed thing. Again lets look at a research quick hitter:
| Claim | Evidence | Field |
|---|---|---|
| Preferences change with experience | Draganski et al. (2006); neuroplasticity | Neuroscience |
| Multisensory learning outperforms single-style learning | Shams & Seitz (2008) | Neuroscience |
| Learners are often unaware of what actually works | Kornell & Bjork (2007) | Psychology |
| Learning strategies evolve with age/context | Gopnik et al. (1999) | Developmental Psych. |
Your learning preference is going to change based on a variety of factors. Emotions & motivation are going to largely influence the learner. The learning environment that is created & their motivation towards the subject is the first thing that’s going to impact their learning preferences. Other environmental factors that could influence learning preferences:
- The physical environment of the place of learning
- Social environment: referencing the relationship between peers & the teacher
- Resources: the materials & technology available to the learner
- Home environment: are the learners basic needs being met & what type of life do they go home to?
- Socioeconomic status
The least talked about thing in Learning Styles promotion is that the brain prefers to expend as little energy as possible & will “prefer” the learning method that requires the least amount of work. So is the learner’s “preferred” Learning Style ever beneficial?
| Author(s) | Paper / Study Title | Summary of Findings |
|---|---|---|
| Raichle, M. E. (2006) | The Brain’s Dark Energy | The brain is energy-hungry but uses default-mode networks for passive, habitual thought to conserve energy. |
| Kool, W., McGuire, J. T., et al. (2010) | Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand | Humans tend to avoid tasks requiring high mental effort, showing a natural bias toward cognitive laziness. |
| Shenhav, A., Botvinick, M. M., et al. (2013) | The Expected Value of Control: An Integrative Theory | The brain weighs the expected benefit of exerting effort against its metabolic cost—often choosing not to. |
| Kahneman, D. (2011) | Thinking, Fast and Slow | Proposes System 1 (fast, lazy, automatic) vs. System 2 (slow, effortful); brain defaults to the lazy System 1. |
| Cheval, B., et al. (2018) | Avoiding sedentary behaviors requires more cortical resources | EEG showed that avoiding inactivity requires effort—suggesting laziness is the brain’s “easier” default. |
Now that were down this rabbit hole, let’s answer the question to the beginning of this section, “How Does The Brain Prefer To Learn?”. To simplify it w/ one word, dopamine. Dopamine impacts learning by improving the ability to focus, increase motivation, & improve memory. Dopamine is released when the brain anticipates a reward, signaling that an action or behavior is desirable and worth repeating. It also helps the brain encode memories, store information more effectively, & strengthen neural pathways associated w/ successful learning.
Dopamine: How To Utilize It To Teach/Coach.
Firstly, dopamine is usually only associated w/ pleasure. However, it also responds to the anticipation of reward, novelty, and progress. Here are the best strategies to trigger more dopamine in your learning environment:
| Author(s) | Paper / Study Title | Strategy | Brief Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Daniel T. Willingham (2009) | Why Don’t Students Like School? | Make learning meaningful | Dopamine increases when new info connects to prior knowledge or relevance—engage emotions and meaning. |
| Judy Willis, M.D. (2007) | The Neuroscience of Joyful Education | Use joyful, low-stress learning | Positive emotions and curiosity enhance dopamine release—reduce fear, increase engagement. |
| Susan Ambrose et al. (2010) | How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles | Set clear goals and give prompt feedback | Dopamine spikes with goal clarity and immediate, constructive feedback to reinforce learning. |
| Angela Duckworth et al. (2007) | Grit: Perseverance and Passion for Long-Term Goals | Celebrate effort, not just outcomes | Recognizing persistence boosts dopamine—helps build intrinsic motivation and learning resilience. |
| Deci & Ryan (1985); Ryan & Deci (2000) | Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior | Offer autonomy and student choice | Choice supports intrinsic motivation; dopamine rises when students feel agency in learning. |
| Mark R. Rosenzweig (1996) | Aspects of the Search for Neural Mechanisms of Memory | Introduce novelty and variation | Novel stimuli activate dopaminergic pathways—change formats, vary routines, add new materials. |
| Carol Dweck (2006) | Mindset: The New Psychology of Success | Promote a growth mindset | Framing failure as opportunity boosts dopamine tied to learning effort and challenge. |
| B.J. Fogg (2009) | A Behavior Model for Persuasive Design | Use micro-goals and positive reinforcement | Small wins trigger dopamine; breaking tasks into tiny steps keeps motivation high. |
| Kou Murayama & Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (2005) | Flow and Achievement in High School | Create “flow” states through challenge | Moderate challenge + skill balance boosts engagement and dopamine—leads to deep learning. |
| John Hattie (2009) | Visible Learning | Provide visible progress and success markers | Students seeing their own progress (feedback, checklists) feel reward anticipation, increasing dopamine. |
Final Thoughts
With everything that has been presented I think it’s a waste of time to the coach & the player to utilize Learning Styles or Preferences. There are better proven strategies that exist, but that’s for you to decide on your own. Using a dopamine rich environment that has clearly defined tasks, immediate feedback, & continues to add depth to prior knowledge using novel tasks will increase the likelihood of flow states. How you do that is an entirely different subject. For now, do your own research & form your own opinions. Because its never going to be your style of coaching until you’ve decided how you want to coach.
Baseball Thought Experiments 