The top 5 theories you're taught in training that aren’t true
Is it just we learning professionals that do this or do people generally like to label things and categorise them and put them in a specific box? As messy as I can be when I’m working and at home, I do like things to be ordered. I have a huge filing cabinet where everything is logically filed away in case I ever need something (like telephone bills from 1996); I’m not kidding, I guess it’s an OCD thing. I’m a bit of a hoarder… you know...’just in case,’ although I suppose you could say that being a bit of a hoarder is like standing at the bottom of Everest and saying “It’s a bit of a climb.”
I only mention this because it seems to me that learning professionals in particular seem to LOVE a graph…a chart....breaking things down with numbers. This is 5%, this is 10%, you’re this type of learner, you’re that type of learner. Whether of course all of the models and learning theories have any substance doesn’t really seem to matter. Once someone says it, it has to be true and in an industry where plagiarism is the norm (come on, don’t deny it), these ‘misconceptions’ (shall we call them) spread like the news of a rare Pokémon being discovered in a New York wood.
In these days of social media, you’d think we’d be wise to checking things out and not taking the latest meme or viewpoint as gospel but we are all guilty of sometimes accepting these random ‘truths’ particularly if they reinforce our own viewpoint and back up what we believe.
If someone presents us with a nice tidy graph or learning theory or allows us to put people in a specific box, it makes us more comfortable perhaps because we think we can define them and know them a little better and perhaps better understand how they tick. If the goal of this is to genuinely help people learn more and develop (I dislike the term ‘to their full potential’ because it doesn’t mean anything), as I’m sure that it is, then perhaps we need to look a bit more closely at the theories and models that we hear about usually through the grapevine because we’re not doing our credibility any good as an industry of professionals by spouting out half- or mis-understood theories that have no basis in reality.
Here are my top 5 myths in reverse order
5) We only use 10% of our brains
This one has been around forever. Well as long as the publication of the well-known book by Dale Carnegie, ‘How To Win Friends and Influence People.’ It was stated in the foreword of this book that ‘the average person develops only 10 percent of his latent mental ability.’ A nice little attention grabbing phrase if you’ve never heard it before but unfortunately with no basis in reality. This myth is still used today by various people to support their own beliefs. For some it shows that we have the capacity to learn much more, retain more information, learn more ‘stuff’ and for some it is an indication that there are untapped areas of the brain that we can put to use that will give us greater powers such as telekinesis or psychic abilities. The fact is we use most of our brains most of the time. Just ask any neuroscientists what they see when scanning someone’s brain with an MRI machine. It’s far from a dull display.
4) People are left or right brained
Whilst we’re on the subject of brains, this brings me to number 4 in my top 5 list; people are predominantly either left or right brained and then further, equating this with left brained people being more analytical and logical and right brained people being more creative.
Not true. Whether we are using our brains logically to solve a puzzle or are using some creative flair and painting a masterpiece we use both sides of the brain equally. Whilst it is true that certain areas of the brain are more active for certain tasks, it has been shown through research that the whole brain is used for both logical and creative activities and it is the neurological connections across the whole of the brain that allow us to perform these tasks. Neither side shows as more dominant than the other.
3) The learning effectiveness pyramid
This model is about the apparent effectiveness of learning methods and says that effective learning depends on the method used. For example, reading has 10% effectiveness, audio-visual 20%, demonstration 30% etc. (see image for the rest).
Perhaps it’s my natural inclination towards Q.E.D but when I first saw this model, it struck me that it seemed all just a little bit too convenient; nicely rounded percentages moving in a mostly equidistant pattern. And it turns out I was right to be sceptical. Studies that have taken place to test the validity of this model have shown that knowledge retention bears no relation to the method used in the way this model infers. What is more relevant is the context with which each learning method is used. Hold onto that thought because we will come back to it later.
2) The 7/38/55 communication rule
At number two we have every trainer’s favourite shocking factoid that only 7% of what we communicate is through words, 38% is through your tone of voice and 55% is through your body language. Now I don’t know about you but if that was true and I asked you to give a presentation about this article using just sounds and body language, you should be able to convey 93% of the information successfully. Would you be able to do that? No of course you wouldn’t. This is a fine example of people finding a nice cosy little model that has a little bit of the ‘oh really?’ factor and running with it without understanding its true meaning. The research was carried out in the 1960s by Albert Mehrabian and relates to positive or negative emotions being communicated via a single spoken word. The percentages are largely meaningless, even more so when you find out that the figures used are a combination of results from different experiments that cannot really be combined. No men were used in the research and other non-verbal communication was ignored (e.g. body posture). Mehrabian himself wrote that the percentages given relate to a specific artificial environment and do not represent percentages of how we communicate normally. And that was the guy who did the research.
1) VAK learning styles
Okay here it is, my number one learning model that simply is not true; that people have a particular learning style, Visual, Auditory or Kinaesthetic and we best learn when we employ that particular method. I can feel lots of learning professionals and leaders gritting their teeth at this one and baying for my blood at the mere suggestion that this trusted method has no basis in reality. It’s been recognised and wheeled out for years in training rooms all over the world. It MUST be true……mustn’t it?
Well apparently not. Studies have shown that there is no correlation between a person’s apparent learning style and how effective their learning is. We all learn in a variety of ways and actually what is of greater import is the context of what it is that needs to be learned. For one particular piece of learning to take place it might be preferable to see it and for something else it might be better to do it. This has a far greater impact on the result and we all learn best using the particular learning style that is best for that particular experience. In that way, we’re all pretty much the same so by all means vary the learning styles used but select the learning style based on the type of learning that needs to happen, not on the perceived learning style of any individual.
Perhaps it’s a lesson for us all not to blindly accept what we’re told simply because we see or hear it or because it is in ‘print’. We need to be sceptical more than ever now in a world where anyone and everyone can write or say anything without traditional censorship, analysis or investigation.
On that note, I’m now off to call my driver and ask him to bring the Rolls round to the front because I’m having dinner with Matt Le Blanc from Top Gear this afternoon and I don’t want to be late.
“JAMES!! BRING THE ROLLS ROUND PLEASE!”
Have a great afternoon everyone.
Glen
If you have any questions or comments regarding this article please do not hesitate to contact me at the following address: enquiries@gpttraining.com
