Do the teachers' mistakes regarding learning styles prove they were right?

Now that learning through sight and sound have sort of been disproven, how are teachers responding? Are they willing to admit to their mistakes? In short, no.



Learning through sight and sound was a concept built off of two seriously flawed concepts that I have already discussed. Sight and sound were shallow anti-individualistic attempts to define the entirety of highly variable learning styles, and they were applied to everything encompassed by their overly broad definition of learning.

Some teachers refuse to abandon their beliefs in learning through sight and sound. Those who accept the evidence have doubled down on the reasons they made the mistake in the first place. Nobody seems willing to accept that they were wrong in the core beliefs that led to teaching through sight and sound.

Again, there were two big mistakes behind these learning styles. Part of the problem was that teachers embraced anti-individualistic hostilities. They didn't think they could argue that all needs are identical. They embraced the idea that there were two learning styles. Two is the minimum required for them to argue that they were meeting variable needs.

What are teachers saying now? Because they were wrong in the idea that there were two valid learning styles, there must only be one. They were right all along in embracing hostilities against individualism when they accepted the concept of learning through sight and sound.

How about their overly broad definition of learning? Sight and sound were based off of beliefs regarding retention of information. In other words, they were focused on memory. They improperly applied this concept to everything classified as learning, such as the development of skills and abilities.

How has this changed? Teachers are citing newer studies regarding retention to establish concepts to apply to everything they classify as learning.

The truth here is that teachers never actually varied their approach for variability learning styles. Sight and sound were used as a defense for using both lectures and reading to push their lessons. Lectures and required reading remain. The evidence presented have only changed one thing. Teachers are citing other flawed arguments to maintain the same approach. Why can't they learn from their mistakes?