top of page
Post: Blog2_Post

When Learning Styles Don’t Matter — But Still Do


When I first wrote about the VARK learning styles — visual, auditory, reading/writing, and kinesthetic — in my book Goal Smasher, I loved how instantly people connected to it. It gave them language for how they like to learn. But I’ll be honest: since then, I’ve read the research. And yes — many studies show that tailoring teaching to learning style doesn’t actually improve outcomes.


Still, I’m not ready to throw VARK out. Because while it may not boost test scores, it does something else: it gives people permission to learn their way. And in a world that often standardizes learning, that kind of personal agency still matters.


Over the last decade, studies have piled up showing that matching learning materials to a student’s "preferred style" — like giving a visual learner only pictures, or an auditory learner only podcasts — doesn’t lead to better performance. The most cited review, published by Pashler et al. in 2008, found no strong evidence that adapting instruction to VARK styles made a meaningful difference in memory, mastery, or skill. Other overviews have echoed the same: good learning is less about personal style and more about engaging deeply with the material itself, regardless of how it's delivered.


In short: liking how you receive information doesn't automatically mean you'll learn it better.

And yet — here’s where I don't let VARK go so easily.

While science might show it’s not a magic formula for better grades, VARK does offer something powerful: a doorway into ownership.

When people feel seen in their learning preferences, they lean in. They become more curious, more self-directed, more willing to explore.

And if you look at the real world — outside of classrooms — you’ll see a clear parallel.

Think about how audiences naturally sort themselves across social media platforms:

  • If you’re a Boomer, chances are you’re spending time on Facebook.

  • If you’re a Millennial, you might lean toward Instagram.

  • If you’re Gen Z, you’re almost certainly scrolling TikTok.

  • If you want fast info but deeper substance, you might hang out on YouTube Shorts.

It’s not that one platform teaches "better" than another. It’s that different audiences show up where the delivery style — short videos, memes, deep dives — matches their natural rhythm.

This is not about learning styles anymore. It’s about decision boundaries, habit formation, and platform fit of deeper engagement.

From a business and data science perspective, understanding where people live — where they consume content easily, joyfully, consistently — is everything. Algorithms optimize for behavior, not for academic theory. And smart communicators and businesses do the same.

Because at the end of the day, the best system isn't the one that's scientifically pure — it's the one people actually use.


Maybe the lesson isn’t that VARK was right or wrong. Maybe the lesson is that people crave connection to ideas, to themselves, to how they process the world. Whether we’re talking about learning, content, or communication, the smartest systems aren’t built to be perfect. They’re built to be usable. Flexible. Human. If the goal is to help people grow, then maybe the best thing we can do isn’t to dismiss what doesn’t test well, but to build bridges between what works in theory and what works in real life.

Because in the end, the most effective kind of learning — is the kind you keep coming back to.


 
 
 

Comments


bottom of page