Tailoring Education: Understanding Individual Learning Styles

Walk into any classroom and you’ll find students who instinctively reach for a pen to take notes, others who prefer to just listen, some who need to touch and build things, and a few who only feel confident once they’ve seen a diagram. This isn’t coincidence – it reflects a real and observable difference in how people prefer to receive and process information. Neil Fleming’s VARK model, introduced in 1992, gave educators a practical framework to understand and work with these differences. Knowing how your students prefer to learn is one of the most useful starting points for designing lessons that actually land.

What is the VARK model? 🔗

Developed by New Zealand educator Neil Fleming and his colleague Colleen Mills, the VARK model categorises learners based on their preferred sensory modality for taking in and processing information. The acronym stands for Visual, Aural (or Auditory), Read/Write, and Kinesthetic. Rather than measuring intelligence or ability, the model focuses specifically on how a person prefers to communicate and engage with content. Fleming’s original intent was straightforward: since it’s unrealistic to expect every educator to fully accommodate every possible learning preference, students should be equipped to understand their own tendencies and adapt accordingly.

To identify preferences, Fleming designed a simple questionnaire – the 16-question VARK inventory – which presents real-world scenarios and asks respondents to choose how they would most naturally respond. The results place learners into one or more of the four modalities. Notably, a large proportion of learners turn out to be multimodal – showing meaningful preferences across two or more categories rather than one dominant style.

The four VARK modalities explained 🔗

Visual (V) 🔗

Visual learners process information most effectively when it is presented in a graphical or spatial format. This does not mean they simply prefer pictures – it means they respond well to charts, graphs, maps, diagrams, flowcharts, and hierarchies that show relationships between ideas. According to Fleming’s original framework, visual learners have a strong capacity for visual recall and benefit greatly from colour-coded material, concept maps, and annotated diagrams. A visual learner studying the water cycle, for instance, will grasp it far faster from a well-labelled diagram than from a paragraph of text.

Aural / auditory (A) 🔗

Aural learners absorb information most readily through listening and speaking. They thrive in environments rich with discussion, debate, lectures, podcasts, verbal explanation, and group conversation. These learners often talk through problems to understand them better. They tend to remember what was said in class more vividly than what was written on the board. In classroom settings, activities like role-play dialogues, read-aloud sessions, and open discussions are particularly effective for engaging aural learners.

Read/write (R) 🔗

This modality is the closest to traditional academic teaching. Read/write learners prefer to engage with information through the written word – reading textbooks, taking detailed notes, creating lists, summarising content, and producing written assignments. Fleming noted that these learners are often drawn to dictionaries, reference guides, printed handouts, and annotated PowerPoints. They tend to learn well in conventional classroom environments, since most formal education already leans heavily on written communication.

Kinesthetic (K) 🔗

Kinesthetic learners understand best through direct experience, practice, and physical engagement. This doesn’t require literal movement – it means learning is anchored in concrete examples, real-world application, and hands-on tasks. According to Fleming, kinesthetic learners recall information more reliably when it is tied to an experience or practical event. They benefit from field trips, lab experiments, simulations, case studies, and anything that connects abstract concepts to tangible outcomes. These learners often struggle with purely theoretical or lecture-based teaching.

Multimodal learners: the majority, not the exception 🔗

One of the most important – and often overlooked – findings from VARK research is that most learners don’t fit neatly into a single category. A study published in PubMed found that nearly 87% of undergraduate students were multimodal in their learning preferences, meaning they draw on two or more modalities depending on context and content type. Fleming himself acknowledged that many learners show strengths across multiple modalities, and the model is designed to reflect this flexibility rather than force everyone into a single box.

This has a direct implication for teaching: if the majority of students are multimodal, then varied, multi-format instruction isn’t just helpful – it’s the most broadly effective approach available. A lesson that incorporates a diagram, a short discussion, a reading task, and a practical exercise is likely to reach most students in the room, regardless of their dominant preference.

Why learning styles matter in the classroom 🔗

Research consistently shows that when educators understand their students’ learning preferences and align instructional approaches accordingly, it enhances not only academic performance but also student engagement, participation, and collaboration. Students are more likely to stay motivated and take ownership of their learning when they encounter content in a format that makes sense to them.

There are several practical ways teachers can identify and respond to different learning preferences in their classrooms. Observation is a powerful starting point – watching how students engage with different activities, noting who gravitates toward visual aids, who asks to talk things through, and who prefers to work with physical objects. Surveys and short questionnaires can supplement observation by giving students a structured way to articulate their preferences. Direct conversations – asking something as simple as “Do you prefer to talk things through or see a picture?” – can also yield useful insight.

Once preferences are understood, differentiated instruction becomes the key strategy. This involves modifying the content (what students engage with), the process (how they work through it), and the product (how they demonstrate understanding). A teacher might offer the same concept through a diagram for visual learners, a recorded explanation for aural learners, a summary handout for read/write learners, and a practical task for kinesthetic learners – all in the same lesson.

Teaching strategies aligned to each modality 🔗

For visual learners 🔗

Use mind maps, infographics, labelled diagrams, colour-coded notes, and timelines. In subjects like science or history, visual representations of processes or chronological events make abstract content far more concrete. Digital tools like interactive whiteboards and online concept mapping software are especially effective for visual learners in modern classrooms.

For aural learners 🔗

Incorporate group discussions, think-pair-share activities, verbal recaps, and podcasts. Allow these learners to explain concepts back to you or to peers – verbalising information is often how they consolidate it. Even brief classroom debates or question-and-answer rounds can significantly improve retention for aural learners.

For read/write learners 🔗

Provide structured handouts, reading lists, written summaries, and note-taking frameworks. Encourage students to rewrite key ideas in their own words, create glossaries, or produce written reflections after a lesson. These learners are often well-served by traditional academic formats, but benefit from explicit guidance on how to organise their written notes effectively.

For kinesthetic learners 🔗

Design experiments, role-plays, project-based tasks, and real-world case studies. Hands-on manipulation of objects, movement activities, and scenario-based learning are particularly effective. Even within a lecture-style lesson, introducing a short practical activity or worked example can significantly boost engagement for kinesthetic learners.

A balanced view: preferences vs. fixed labels 🔗

While the VARK model is a widely used and practically useful framework, it’s important to treat it as a starting point, not a fixed label. Some researchers and neuroscientists have cautioned against rigidly matching instruction to a single identified learning style. Critics argue that categorising learners too firmly can oversimplify the complexity of learning and may even limit students’ development by discouraging them from engaging with unfamiliar modes. Neuroscientist Susan Greenfield has noted that humans are naturally multisensory learners – our brains process information through many interconnected pathways simultaneously.

The practical takeaway from this debate is not to abandon the VARK framework, but to use it thoughtfully. Research consistently supports multimodal instruction – presenting information through a combination of visual, auditory, textual, and experiential formats – as the most effective general approach. When learners engage with content through multiple channels at once, comprehension deepens and retention improves. The VARK model is most valuable not as a rigid categorisation tool, but as a lens that encourages educators to think consciously about the diversity of preferences in any given classroom.

As Fleming and Baume themselves noted, much classroom teaching tends to be mono- or bi-modal, often reflecting the teacher’s own preferred style rather than the students’. Awareness of VARK nudges educators to deliberately vary their instructional repertoire and move beyond what feels natural to them personally.

Identifying your students’ learning preferences: practical steps 🔗

Getting started doesn’t require overhauling your entire curriculum. A few targeted steps can make a meaningful difference:

Administer the VARK questionnaire at the beginning of a term. It takes under ten minutes and gives both you and your students a useful baseline. Observe engagement patterns during varied lesson activities and note which students respond most positively to which formats. Vary your delivery deliberately – rotate between lectures, discussions, visuals, and practical tasks across your lessons rather than defaulting to one format. Build flexible assessment options where possible, allowing students to demonstrate understanding through presentations, written tasks, visual projects, or practical demonstrations. The Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework offers a complementary structure here, advocating for multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression as core principles of inclusive teaching.

The goal is not to track every student into a rigid style box, but to expand the range of your teaching repertoire so that more students find more entry points into the content you’re teaching. Recognising that a kinesthetic learner isn’t being difficult when they’re restless during a lecture, or that a read/write learner isn’t disengaged when they’re quietly summarising rather than joining a discussion – these small shifts in interpretation can meaningfully change how a teacher responds to student behaviour.

What do you think? Does knowing your own learning preference change how you approach lesson planning – and if most of your students are multimodal, how might you redesign a single lesson to reach all four VARK modalities without significantly increasing your preparation workload?

References

1. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/education/vark-model
2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24823519/
3. https://tracyharringtonatkinson.com/fleming-vark-theory/
4. https://impactteachers.com/blog/teaching-students-with-different-learning-styles/
5. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394744560_IDENTIFYING_LEARNERS_LEARNING_STYLES_USING_THE_VARK_MODEL
6. https://affinityworkforce.com/jobseekers/teacher-jobs/adapting-teaching-strategies-for-different-learning-styles/
7. https://publish.illinois.edu/guelton2/2025/05/29/adapting-teaching-techniques-for-different-learning-styles/
8. https://www.childcareed.com/a/how-can-we-adapt-our-teaching-approaches-to-meet-different-learning-styles-in-young-children.html
9. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10212-020-00485-2
10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles
11. https://truelearn.com/resource-library/multimodal-learning-vs-learning-styles-what-science-says/
12. https://www.vark-learn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Educational-Developments.pdf
13. https://online.lynn.edu/resources/education/teaching-different-learning-styles