The Learning Pyramid

  The other day, I stumbled across something referred to as the "Learning Pyramid" was either developed in the 1940's and was based on Edger Dale's cone of Learning or it was introduced by the Learning National Training Lab in the 60's.  Supposedly it show the best ways people can use to retain information. 

Edger Jones, an expert on audio visual learning, wrote a book on using audio visual methods in teaching.  His cone of experience focused on the abstractness of the idea via various methods of presentation.  Apparently, he argued that teachers should use the different methods rather than talking about retention.

The original cone of learning did not have percentages but those were added later perhaps by someone who wanted to turn it into the "magic bullet." The first paper citing percentages came out in 1967, almost 20 years after Dale's publication.   Supposedly the National Learning Lab researched each instructional method and found the pyramid to be accurate but all related data disappeared and is not available.

The idea is that you are more likely to retain 90 percent of the material if you immediately teach it to someone one else whereas you only retain 75 percent if all you do is practice it.  The percents decrease if you only talk about it, watch a demonstration, listening, reading, or lecturing in that order.

It sounds good but is it accurate.  Has research over the past 40 to 60 years supported or disproved it. I admit, it sounds quite good but its origin is attributed to a couple of different authors.  The basic idea is the more active the learning is, the better retention but is it true?  Are the percentages even right?

Although it is still swirling around and is found on many web sites, there appears to be no scientific evidence to support this particular idea.  According to a study done in 2013, the content, the individuals age, the time between learning and retrieving the information, and other factors.  Furthermore, another study indicated that all methods resulted in retention but none were more effective than another based on the material being learned and the context in which it is learned.

It has been pointed out that reading is a valid method of learning especially for "Life Long Learners".  Furthermore, reading has been proven to be an effective method of instruction, especially when combined with direct instruction.  It has also been suggested that no real research ever comes out with such neat and tidy percentages that are multiples of 10.  Is the claim that a learner can retain 90 percent of what they've learned be real?

From what I've been able to find, the best method is to use the different methods listed as appropriate to the material, the students, and the way the different instructional techniques are used.  Add into that interleaving and retrieving information and retention goes up.

Let me know what you think.  I'd love to hear.

Side Note:  I will be presenting and attending the Alaska State Technology in Education Conference this weekend till Wednesday when I return home.  I hope to share some of the new things I learn with you over the next couple of weeks.