THE LEARNING PYRAMID: DOES IT POINT TEACHERS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION? JAMES P. LALLEY ROBERT H. MILLER Education Department D'Youville College This paper raises serious questions about the reliability of the learning pyramid as a guide to retention among students. The pyramid suggests that certain teaching methods are connected with a corresponding hierarchy of student retention. No specific credible research was uncovered to support the pyramid, which is loosely associated with the theory proposed by the well- respected researcher, Edgar Dale. Dale is credited with creating the Cone of Experience in 1946. The Cone was designed to rep- resent the importance of altering teaching methods in relation to student background knowledge: it suggests a continuum of meth- ods not a hierarchy. While no credible research was uncovered to support the pyramid, clear research on retention was discovered regarding the importance of each of the pyramid levels: each of the methods identified by the pyramid re.sulted in retention, with none being consistently superior to the others and all being effec- tive in certain contexts. A key conclusion from the literature reviewed rests with the critical importance of the teacher as a knowledgeable decision maker for choosing instructional meth- ods. The Learning Pyramid (see Figure 2) is been questioned (Thalheimer, 2005). an often-cited guide for teachers to use for Therefore, it is our intention to examine designing effective instruction. It can be the following: the source of the general found in books (Sousa, 2001; Danielson, structure of the pyratnid. Dale's Cone of 2002; Drewes & Milligan, 2003), articles Experience; available research on reten- in refereed journals {Wood. 2004; Brueck- tion from the methods identified by the ner & MacPherson, 2004; Darmer et al., pyramid; and consider the relationship(s) 2004; DeKanter. 2005) and in teacher among the methods. resources {Boulmetis, 2003; Hershman & McDonald, 2003). Further, a recent inter- Dale's Cone of Experience net search using Google® returned 12,200 Edgar Dale was a protninent educator hits, of which 452 were from cites with and nationally known scholar regarding the generic top level domain .org, 313 from the use of media in instruction. He had a .edu, and 30 from .gov. While it appears an laudable career at the Ohio State Univer- intuitive model and an implied compre- sity and its media center is named in his hensive research summary, the logic of the honor. In 1946 Dale published the first of model, as well as its research base, have three editions of his infiuential 64 Examining the Learning .../ 65 Visual Methods in Teaching. The puipose ation. Nor do we suggest that teach- of the text was to delineate: ers scrap all procedures that do not the use of audio-visual materials in involve a variety of audio-visual teaching - materials that do not methods (Dale, 1954, p. 3, italics in depend primarily upon reading to original) convey their meaning. It is based upon the principle that all teaching The 1946 edition included the debut of can he greatly improved by the use his Cone of Experience (See Figure 1). The of such materials because they can cone was Dale's attempt to organize vari- help make the learning experience ous types of experience according to their memorable...this central idea has, levels of abstractness, with Direct, Pur- of course, certain limits. We do not poseful Experiences being the at least mean that sensory materials must be abstract (or most concrete) end ofthe con- introduced into every teaching situ- tinuutn, and Verbal Symbols, the most DALE'S CONE OF EXPERIENCE ^^^^^^^^^^^^^m RocordlnBt - Radio ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^| ^^^^^^^^^^^V Still Plcturai ^^^^^^^^^^^H ^^^^^^^^^^^M Motion Picture! ^^^^^^^^^^^H ^^^^^^^^m TelevlalDn ^^^^^^^^H ^^^^^V Exhibits ^^^^^H ^^^V Fiold Trtp> ^^^^1 ^^^V OBmonstraHons ^^^^| ^V Dramatized Experlencas ^^| F Contrived Expenances V i Direci • Purposeful Exp«rienc«s \ Figure I. Dale\s Cone of Experience, 1954 66 / Education Vol. 128No.1 abstract, at the other. However, he notes are abstractions. In Dale's words, the cone that there will clearly be overlap among serves as a "visual metaphor of learning the levels. Before proceeding, we should experiences" and that "you will make a note that that there were modifications to dangerous mistake, however, if you regard the cone to accommodate emerging tech- the bands on the cone as rigid, inflexible nologies (e.g.., television was added in divisions" (1954, p.42). Also, he notes that 1954) in the three editions of his text (Dale, "increasing abstractness does not mean 1946; 1954; 1969)). However, the gener- increasing difficulty" (1954, p.42). Final- al construct of the cone, progressing from ly, in presenting a notion that still applies the concrete to the abstract, remained to schools today, instruction would typi- intact. cally improve if it included opportunities Dale describes Direct, Purposeful Expe- for Direct Experience. To provide balance, riences as those in which "you have direct however, he goes on to cite Dewey (1916) participation, with responsibility in the who reminds us that while direct experi- outcome" {{954, p. 42, italics in original). ences are important to learning they are He asserts that our most vivid memories are also, by their very nature, limiting: learn- often the result of direct experiences. As ing about a geographic region in sensory an example. Dale offers performing a lab- stimulating manner (i.e., being there) oratory experiment as direct experience. would indeed be a valuable experience. However, he goes on to note that: However, that experience would be very restricted in terms of developing an under- Life cannot, of course, be lived standing of geography, its multiple exclusively on this direct, concrete, components, and numerous regions (bet- sensory level. Whenever we remem- ter learned from a map)—although it is ber something we have experienced, likely a good beginning. Clearly, Dale rec- we have begun to abstract. Even our ognized the importance of having a variety earliest experiences involve some of learning experiences and the comple- degree of abstraction. As very young mentary nature of those experiences. children we learn to talk about the doll or the cat or the man that is not The Learning Pyramid physically present, and thus our At some point. Dale's original cone of direct, concrete experience becomes experience was transformed into the ubiq- associated with abstractions. (1954, uitous Learning Pyramid (Figure 2). To be p. 44, italics in original) more accurate, we should say Learning Pyramids, given that it has taken on more Dale prefaced his presentation of the than one form over the years (it is also cone with the reminder that the gap common to find the pyramid labeled as between the least and the most abstract is Dale's Cone). The pyramid replaces levels often quite narrow, noting that even the of experience with instructional methods, words of small children, for whom we often with lecture occupying the peak of the advocate concrete learning experiences. pyramid, followed by reading, etc. with Examining the Learning .../ 67 the lowest level being teaching others, and ent methods, as well as different levels of indicates various levels of retention asso- retention ascribed to these methods. For ciated with each method. There are. example, the most common pyramid (e.g., however, more levels in the cone than are Sousa, 2001) identifies lecture at the top typically found in the pyramid (i.e., there of the pyramid and indicates that its cor- is not a one-to-one correspondence responding level of retention at five between the levels of the cone and the lev- percent, with reading falling below it with els of the pyramid). As noted, there are a retention level often percent. In contrast, variations of the pyramid that include a the National Training Laboratories, for- different hierarchy of methods or differ- merly of Bethel Maine and currently Learning Pyramid (Average Learning Retention Rates) National Training Laboratories, Bethel Maine Figure 2: A Typical Presentation of the Learning Pyramid 68 / Education VoL 128 No.l located in Alexandria Virginia, provides a sion. Yes, we believe it to be accu- pyramid that locates reading at the top with rate - but no, we no longer have - a retention level of ten percent, followed nor can we find - the original by hearing with a retention level of 20 per- research that supports the numbers. cent. We get many inquiries every month Additional information regarding the about this - and many, many people pyramid raises questions of credibility. The have searched for the original National Training Laboratories, in response research and have come up empty to an email request from a member of the handed. We know that in 1954 a sim- Academic Computing Department at the ilar pyramid with slightly different College of Charleston in South Carolina, numbers appeared on p. 43 of a book stated the following about the pyramid: called Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching, published by the Edgar It was developed and used by NTL Dale Dryden Press in New York. Yet Institute at our Bethel, Maine cam- the Learning Pyramid as sucb seems pus in the early sixties when we were to have been modified and always still part of the National Education has been attributed to NTL Institute. Association's Adult Education Divi- PacifiCnrp CSS Train the Trainer PEOPLE GEISERALLY REMEMBER An important teaming principle, supported by extensive research, is thatpeopte team best when they are activety involved in tht teaming process. The "iower down the cone' you go, the more you team and retain. 10% of what Read they read I 20H of what they hear / Hear a lecture 30% of what Looti at exhibits, mock-ups, they see i diagrams, displays 50% of what they / Watch live demonstrations, videos or HEAR Ai\D SBE I movie, go on a site visit 70% of what they SAY or WRITE Complete ivorksheets, manuals, discussion guides 9(1% of what they l~ Simulate a reai experience SAY AS THEY DO / (practice, with coaching) ANACTIVITY / Do the reai thing Adapted from .iudio-Visual Methods in TeachingEdgar Dale DryJen Pre.is, N.Y., 1954 p.