From Learning Styles to Learning Science: Footstep Training’s Reflections for Educators and Trainers

At Footstep Training, we’re committed to keeping our practice rooted in evidence, not assumption. Recently, we read a thought-provoking article published by the Association for Business Psychology (ABP) examining the long-standing belief in learning styles and the scientific evidence that challenges it.

The article prompted us to pause and reflect — not just on what the research says, but on what this means for our learners, many of whom are educators, trainers, assessors, mentors, and leaders responsible for supporting learning in real-world settings.

This blog shares our reflections and, more importantly, what this evidence means for those who teach and develop others.

A Familiar Idea — And Why It’s So Hard to Let Go

For many of us, learning styles were introduced early in our teaching or training careers. Whether it was visual, auditory, or kinaesthetic learning, or models such as Kolb or Honey and Mumford, the message was consistent: identify the learner’s style and adapt accordingly.

It felt respectful, inclusive, and learner-centred. And in many ways, the intention behind learning styles was well-meaning — to recognise individual differences and improve learning outcomes.

However, as the ABP article clearly outlines, decades of research now show that matching teaching to learning styles does not improve learning.

What the Evidence Really Tells Us

Large-scale reviews and meta-analyses — including the work of Coffield, Pashler, and Hattie — have consistently found little to no evidence that aligning teaching methods with learning styles leads to better outcomes.

Most recently, Hattie and O’Leary’s (2025) meta-analysis of over 105,000 learners confirms this again. The so-called “matching hypothesis” produces an effect size close to zero. In simple terms: it doesn’t meaningfully work.

What’s particularly important for educators to understand is this:

Learning style questionnaires don’t identify how people learn best — they often capture how people like to learn or the strategies they currently use.

Preference is not performance.

Why This Matters for Our Learners Who Teach

Many Footstep Training learners work directly with others — in classrooms, training rooms, workplaces, and online learning environments. When learning styles dominate practice, several risks emerge:

• Time and energy are spent trying to “match” delivery rather than strengthen learning

• Learners may limit themselves (“I’m not a reader” or “I can’t learn this way”)

• Teaching becomes over-simplified, rather than cognitively rich

As educators and trainers, our role isn’t to categorise learners — it’s to develop capability, confidence, and long-term retention.

What Works Instead: Evidence-Based Teaching That Supports Everyone

The most encouraging message from the research is this: effective learning strategies benefit all learners.

Decades of cognitive and educational psychology point to approaches that consistently improve learning, regardless of preference:

• Retrieval practice – encouraging learners to recall information, not just recognise it

• Spaced learning – revisiting content over time rather than cramming

• Clear explanations and modelling

• High-quality feedback

• Appropriate cognitive challenge

These strategies strengthen memory, deepen understanding, and support transfer into practice — exactly what our learners need when they are teaching others in professional contexts.

For those delivering training or education, this means designing learning that is intentional, challenging, and reflective, rather than simply varied for the sake of style.

Personalisation Without the Myth

Rejecting learning styles doesn’t mean rejecting individual needs.

At Footstep Training, we believe true learner-centred practice means:

• Supporting learners to develop effective study and learning strategies

• Creating inclusive learning environments with multiple opportunities to engage

• Helping learners understand how learning works, not labelling how they learn

This empowers learners far more than assigning them a “type”.

Our Footstep Reflection

The ABP article is a timely reminder that good teaching is not about intuition alone — it’s about informed, reflective practice.

As educators, trainers, and leaders, we have a responsibility to challenge well-intentioned myths and replace them with approaches that genuinely support learning, wellbeing, and performance.

Moving beyond learning styles allows us to focus on what really matters:helping people learn deeply, retain knowledge, and apply it with confidence.

That’s the step forward we believe in.