Research consistently shows that students absorb, retain, and apply knowledge through markedly different cognitive pathways, and recognising these individual differences is among the most consequential insights in modern educational psychology. Educators who account for varied learning styles report measurably better student engagement and retention outcomes. We are faced with a lot of different learning experiences, which has greater impacts than others in our lives and one can chalk this down to the learning approach – this is the process where individuals define information about their environment and has a different learning style, and by this I mean the way in which they absorb, analyze, and retain information which makes every one of us unique in our own special way.
All individuals learn differently, some by stimulation of their five senses, and when enhanced greater learning takes place. Neurological research published in journals such as Educational Psychology Review suggests that sensory-based learning activates multiple brain regions simultaneously, reinforcing memory encoding in ways that single-mode instruction may not. Every individual has a method by which they learn; therefore one person’s way of learning is very different from that of their peers.
The question of “what is a learning approach?” sits at the heart of how instructors can best tailor educational environments to student needs. A learning approach may be defined as the preferred way of acquiring knowledge and processing information. Understanding the learning approach of individuals consists of the question, “what is a learning approach?” which is the preferred way of acquiring knowledge and processing information. This approach affects how we learn, solve problems, partake in different activities and react to the environment. When students are given the opportunity to engage with material through their preferred modality, academic performance and long-term comprehension tend to improve significantly.
The original research work to the approaches of learning was carried out by F. Marton and R. Saljo (1976), where they explored an individual’s approach to learning and identified two main approaches: ‘surface’ and ‘deep’. Their findings, drawn from studies of university students in Sweden, revealed that the quality of learning — not merely the quantity of effort — determined how well students could apply knowledge in novel contexts.
Surface learning is the silent acceptance of information, memorization and unlinked facts which leads to superficial memory. Whereas deep learning involves critical analysis of new ideas, and principles, leading to the understanding and long term memory of concepts which is used for problem solving. Students who habitually adopt a deep approach, according to Entwistle and McCune (2004), demonstrate superior transferability of knowledge across academic disciplines and professional settings. The distinction matters particularly in fields such as social care, nursing, and law, where rote memorisation alone cannot prepare practitioners for the unpredictability of real-world cases.
The basis of this understanding is to identify the individual with a fixed approach to learning and an opportunity to encourage that individual to adopt a particular learning approach. Shifting a learner from a surface to a deep orientation typically requires deliberate pedagogical scaffolding, including problem-based tasks, reflective journaling, and guided peer discussion rather than passive lecture formats.
Most of us are easily confused with the difference between learning and acquiring knowledge, they are different; ‘learning is the continuous process of addition,’ and ‘acquiring knowledge is memory, an idea stored up as experience.’ Learning as the cognitive process of acquired change in behavior, results from a learner’s interaction with the environment which brings about experience. Learning is the acquiring of new knowledge, skills, values, preferences and understanding. It also strengthens, organise and shape our brains. The distinction has direct practical implications: a social care student who has acquired facts about legislation has not necessarily learned how to apply them ethically in a crisis situation.
Learning effectively entails the possession of four abilities: concrete experience; reflective observation; abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. These styles were developed to challenge an individual’s mode of learning that seeks to reduce the potential of their intelligence. Importantly, Kolb’s model proposes that true learning only occurs when a student moves through all four stages of the cycle, rather than dwelling exclusively within one preferred mode.
There is a lot of information about how one learns and many of us understand that each individual learns differently or has a preference to learning. David A. Kolb (1984), a pioneer in this field of experiential learning, created four learning elements and states we learn by following this cycle. Morris (2020) conducted a meta-analysis of Kolb’s experiential learning model and found that educational programmes structured around the full four-stage cycle produced significantly higher learner satisfaction and knowledge retention compared to traditional didactic instruction.
Honey and Mumford (1992) defined four styles based around these four stages of Kolb’s learning cycle, and these styles were developed to challenge an individual’s mode of learning. Depending on an individual’s preference, they are classified as: ‘Reflectors’ are substituted for divergent (reflective observation), these are people who are thoughtful analyzers of situations, they listen to others before speaking, collect data and analyze before making decisions. ‘Theorists’ are substituted for assimilator (abstract conceptualization), these people are objective rather than subjective, they collect, analyze and use logical approaches in developing theories concerning a given course of action, and likes theories that makes sense. ‘Pragmatists’ are substituted for converger (concrete experience), these people are interested in trying out new ideas to see if they work, they like getting things done rather than seeing ideas discussed and delayed for consideration, they stick with long term activities if it shows promise of working or being functional. Recognising which category a learner belongs to allows educators and supervisors to assign tasks and learning experiences that align with how that individual processes information most effectively.
‘Activists’ are substituted for accommodators (active experimentation), they are risk-takers, are willing to try new experiences and are open-minded to new things, enjoy challenges and are bored easily with long term activities. In a Social Care training environment, Activist-type learners often thrive during role-play simulations and crisis scenario exercises, whereas Theorist learners may need additional time with case literature before feeling confident in practice.
Learning takes place through a wide variety of methods and styles, which encourages an individual to challenge new ideas, views and beliefs. The effectiveness of this approach caters to the different learning styles each individual brings to the fore. There are a diverse range of cultures and backgrounds of different people and individuals that have opportunities to learn from their peers through discussions, debates and joint study. Peer learning, in particular, has been found to address gaps that formal instruction alone may leave, especially when students bring lived experience relevant to the subject matter.
As a Social Care student applying learning styles, these help service users learn by structuring what works for them which supports their learning and creates character. Tailoring support to the individual learning profile of a service user can transform engagement, particularly for those who have had negative prior experiences of formal education.
Service users are individuals that need motivation in order to learn, which in turn develop their learning styles to help them with problem solving, exploring new ideas and issues based on their intelligences. They have to make their learning a priority and the benefits of the learning styles help them to identify with their ability to learn, which gives them an outline on the effectiveness they have learned from experience. When service users feel that their preferred learning style is respected rather than overridden, self-directed skill development tends to accelerate noticeably.
Learning styles determine the things people learn and the methods they use to learn them. The elements of these styles are to highlight the individual’s preferred learning style which will equip them to choose learning opportunities that expands their knowledge to reflect, which improves one’s learning and performance, by identifying what that individual had done well and what should be improved for that same individual to become an all-round learner, which in turn makes them a success for the future.
The application of learning style theory in higher education and professional training has attracted considerable debate in recent years, with some researchers questioning whether a fixed “style” label may inadvertently limit learner development. Pashler et al. (2008) and subsequent scholars have argued that students benefit most when exposed to varied instructional formats regardless of their stated preference, as cross-modal engagement may strengthen cognitive flexibility. What appears clear from the accumulated evidence, however, is that awareness of how one processes information — whether reflectively, theoretically, pragmatically, or through active experimentation — provides a meaningful foundation for self-regulated learning. Students who understand their own tendencies are better positioned to seek out complementary experiences that round out their capabilities, rather than defaulting to familiar but potentially limiting habits. For Social Care practitioners in particular, where effective communication and adaptability across diverse service user populations are non-negotiable competencies, cultivating awareness of one’s learning orientation may be as professionally significant as any specific body of knowledge acquired during training.
References
Entwistle, N., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual bases of study strategy inventories. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 325–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/0007099042000237407
Morris, T. H. (2020). Experiential learning – a systematic review and revision of Kolb’s model. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(8), 1064–1077. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496420973074
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1992). The manual of learning styles (3rd ed.). Peter Honey Publications.