Two Common Learning Myths

In the world of Learning & Development, certain models and theories have gained popularity over the years. While they offer intuitive frameworks, it’s necessary to scrutinize their empirical foundations and give nuance to their messages. Here are two common beliefs in the training world that you should take with a grain of salt.

The 70-20-10 Model

What is it?

This model argues that 70% of learning comes from on-the-job experiences, 20% from interactions with others, and 10% from formal educational events. Introduced by Morgan McCall, Michael M. Lombardo, and Robert A Eichinger in a publication named The Career Architect Development Planner, the findings were based on a survey of about 200 successful executives. They were asked a version of

“Please identify at least three key events in your career, things that made a difference in the way you manage now. 1) What happened? 2) What did you learn from it (for better or worse)?”

From there, the research summarized responses into the aforementioned 70, 20, and 10 categories. As can be seen, the survey prompt is geared more towards how an individual’s career is shaped, rather than how they learn. There’s also limited insight into the categorization method behind the responses. In other words, it’s hard to take these findings and say, “here are the ways people learn and their percent split.” As Andrew Jefferson and Roy Pollock mention in their 2014 criticism of the model, “the right training at the right time can have a significant impact, but whether that is 2 percent or 22 percent is impossible to say – and neither scientific nor terribly useful.”

Takeaway

The model can be a somewhat useful metaphor that encourages giving learners diverse learning experiences. However, it shouldn’t be used as a hard and fast rule.

Learning Styles (VARK)

What is it?

According to this belief, people have preferred styles of learning. VARK (Visual, Auditory, Reading/writing, or Kinesthetic) says learning professionals should tailor instruction to an individual’s preferences.

Introduced by Neil Fleming in the 1970s, VARK was developed to help individuals understand their learning preferences. However, despite popularity, research over the years has shown that matching teaching methods to learning styles does not significantly impact learning effectiveness. For example, in their 2006 study, Gregory Kratzig & Katherine Arbuthnott at the University of Regina found that teaching to a self-identified learning style had no impact on learning in participants.

More recently, comprehensive reviews like Pashler et al. (2009) and Rogowsky et al. (2014) reinforce the same point: no credible experimental evidence supports the idea that teaching in someone’s preferred style leads to better outcomes.

Takeaway

While being aware of different modalities to teach is helpful, educators and trainers should focus on evidence-based instructional strategies rather than a particular style of learning.

Conclusion

It’s easy to see why models like 70-20-10 and learning styles persist. They’re simple, intuitive, and offer a sense of structure in a complex field. But in the world of learning, what’s popular isn’t always what’s effective. These beliefs can be helpful starting points or metaphors, but they shouldn’t be mistaken for scientifically sound principles. As learning professionals, we owe it to our organizations and learners to stay curious, question the familiar, and build on approaches that are backed by evidence, not just tradition.