As part of my Masters of Education degree from the University of Illinois, I experienced several courses that focused on the transfer of learning and examined exactly how individuals convert information to which they are exposed into something that they understand and can use in the future. As a teacher, I have organized my presentations around a simple model of absorb, connect and apply. The absorb step involves sharing information with students and requires that the recipient is actually paying attention. More than just hearing, a successful absorb activity requires the student to truly understand what is being said. Hearing is not listening, and listening is critical to learning.

There exist several theories that individuals have different preferences for how they learn. Research suggests that people utilize different learning modalities based on their sensory preferences. This particular theory suggests that some people are auditory learners, others are visual learners and still others are kinesthetic oriented. Auditory learners, as the theory goes, are well suited to understand what they hear and convert that information to useful knowledge. Visual learners are more inclined to convert information to knowledge if they can see it. Kinesthetic learners, it is suggested, are more prone to learn when they physically interact with the subject or can imagine doing so through the use of stories told that recreate a specific application of the topic. This theory would predict that an effective absorb activity would require a combination of speaking, showing and doing.

While the theory has its detractors, I have found it to be a useful tool in providing instruction. In addition to applying my transfer of learning model, I also consider learning styles when constructing my approach. My seminars include auditory, visual and kinesthetic elements in hopes that the curriculum is easier to convert from information to knowledge. My experience from having conducted thousands of seminars, workshops and keynote speeches (not to mention conducting countless business meetings) over the years is that there is validity to the theory. I believe that while all people can learn in all three ways, we do possess preferences for one of the three styles.

I am reminded of this very often when conversing with my wife. There is no person on the planet that is more important to me; no person for whom I care more about what is on her mind. Still, when Lori is speaking to me, I often find myself distracted by the television or succumbing to the siren call of the Internet. It is maddening and disappointing to me that I could miss information she was sharing because I was fascinated by something on Judge Judy or the highlights of a baseball game that didn’t even involve my beloved New York Mets (I know, shut up). Eventually, it dawned on me that my learning preferences were distinctly kinesthetic and visually oriented while my lovely bride was communicating using a pure auditory fashion.

This was not her fault. She has no responsibility to construct a lesson plan that includes all forms of teaching devices simply to tell me about her day. I would suggest that using stories to share the information will be more effective, a technique at which she has become quite adept. The responsibility to listen more effectively falls to me. I realize now that it is hard for me to tune out television and technological stimulation, both of which are packed full of visual and kinesthetic elements, in favor of focusing on auditory content. Simply put, when Lori begins speaking, I need to shut my laptop and turn off the television to be the best listener I can be. Of course, many times Lori is actually talking to one of our dogs or to herself. Both of those subjects appear to be better and more consistent listeners than me.