The science behind
ACCELERATED LEARNING
An exploration of the research, theory and results
Bill Lucas explores the growth of accelerated
learning (AL) to establish its importance to
successful learning
I
s fast learning a good thing? Is it better achieved slowly,
or does it depend on what you are learning? Is AL based
on good science about the way we learn? Is it a blend of
neuro- and psycho-babble masquerading as a theory of
learning? Or is it somewhere in between, with some useful
bits and some questionable assertions and propositions? Let’s
explore these questions in a little more detail.
What is AL?
Search the Internet for ‘accelerated learning’ and you will find
over three million sites to visit. The vast majority of these are
publishers, training providers and purveyors of educational or
self-improvement resources. There are also journals, societies
and institutes. If you want, to you can become accredited as an
AL practitioner. In other words, like any good idea, this whole
field has been commercialised.
There is no one accepted definition of AL today. I offer this
synthesis of the many definitions that I have looked at:
‘Accelerated learning combines aspects of adult learning
theory with “brain-based” approaches, in order to achieve a
faster learning rate.’
Different thinkers also advocate different models of the
learning process, many putting emphasis on the engagement
and demonstration stages. Let’s explore which aspects of adult
learning theory are relevant, and what it is about the brain that
practitioners of AL think is important. Before we embark on our
journey, however, let me try to tell the story so far.
A brief history of AL
When it began in the 1970s, AL was revolutionary. Its
starting point was completely different from anything on offer
at that time. Educationalists still thought about curriculum,
terms, courses and examinations. Trainers dealt in lectures,
demonstrations, classes and workshops.
Suddenly, out of the blue, came an approach that seemed
very different. It argued that:
➜ learners and active learning were more important than
teachers and courses
➜ the way people teach and train was out of step with
the way the brain works, and
➜ it was possible for learners to become much more
engaged and motivated in their learning and therefore
learn faster.
Early proponents talked about the brain, about emotions,
about learning styles and much more.
Arguably, AL all started with the work of Georgi Lozanov1,
a Bulgarian professor of psychiatry and psychotherapy, and
his philosophy of ‘suggestology’. This simple idea aimed
at engaging all of the senses and many of our emotions
in an attractive learning environment, and harnessing the
naturally positive attitude to learning that we all have within
us. Lozanov’s thinking built on and paralleled work on
experiential learning – undertaken by David Kolb and others
at around the same time.
At roughly the same moment, in another part of the world,
Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) was starting out, too. I
mention this because NLP and AL have grown to share various
common characteristics over the years, so that sometimes
it is difficult to see where one starts and the other ends.
Approaches to motivation and non-verbal communication
are two examples of what I have in mind. Both AL and NLP
were early examples of learning ‘brands’ which were eagerly
‘bought’ by many people disgruntled with the educational
system as it then was.
It’s worth remembering that these were very exciting times.
Amazing things were happening in terms of scientific discoveries,
and new technology was allowing us tantalising glimpses of the
way the human brain works. You only have to watch what took
place in the 1970s and 1980s to see the ways in which AL
absorbed much of the new thinking in neuroscience, and some
elements of psychology, during these decades.
First of all, when Roger Sperry and, later, Roger Ornstein
proposed the idea of two brain hemispheres (left and right),
this was absorbed. The same happened when Paul Maclean
created the idea of the triune brain (reptilian, mammalian
and neo-mammalian), and suggested the brain had evolved
from the bottom, providing a model for how the brain works,
especially with regard to the impact of stress.
So when in the 1980s Howard Gardner threw down a
gauntlet2 to the prevailing orthodoxy of IQ by suggesting that
we have multiple intelligences, AL was only too ready to include
this as well. A few years later, when emotional intelligence
came along, much of this approach was incorporated, too. ➨
KEY LEARNING POINTS
• AL embraces a number of different approaches to learning.
• Some of what is done in the name of AL is simply not based on any
scientific evidence.
• Much of AL draws on widely accepted and scientifically proven approaches.
• Training practitioners need to know what is true and what is learning ‘spin’!
July 2005 Training Journal 33
 Throughout the 1990s, as alternative therapies and
developments in neuroscience have arrived thick and fast, so
AL has embraced many of these too.
• visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learning styles
• the Mozart effect, and
• men are from Mars and women from Venus.
Theories of adult learning
Part of the thinking behind AL draws on theories about adult
learning. Indeed, it essentially belongs to a tradition of
constructivist thinking that goes back to John Dewey and also
includes David Kolb and the concept of experiential learning.
In terms of its thinking about motivation, there are direct lines
to the humanistic tradition espoused by Abraham Maslow, the
notion of a hierarchy of needs, and Carl Rogers.
Brain-based learning
However, there are some elements of AL, many of which were
the very things that first made it seem so different, that had not
previously been talked about by educationalists and trainers.
These are mostly those taken from the realm of neuroscience.
And it is here that AL has sometimes been its own worst enemy,
believers have often taken big ideas and applied
them too literally, or approached really complex
areas about which the science is still very much Idea
in its infancy, and invested them with certainty
Only use 10% of brain power Simply not true
and with the simplicity of ‘pop’ psychology.
This has led to an outbreak of neuro- or
pscyho-babble and has unnecessarily put VAK
people off. It has owed much more to branding
and the need to position AL distinctively in a
crowded market than to good science. Learning styles
The myths surrounding AL
We use less than 10 per cent of our Left/right brains
brain power
This is simply not true. It’s shock tactics to get
people to pay undue attention to brain facts. Mozart effect
The more we find out about the brain, the more
we realise that we are using many parts of it
for much of the time. If this were rephrased as
Mind and body
a statement about people mostly only realising
a small percentage of their potential, then that
would be true. But as it is, it implies that whole Relaxed/alert state
parts of our brains are somehow shut down only
to be opened up through AL!
Importance of engagement
VAK – We are all either visual, auditory process
or kinaesthetic learners
No we are not! Certainly we acquire habits Multiple intelligences
and temporary preferences. But the simplistic
suggestion – present in much of the literature of
AL – that you can somehow work out which of
these three types of learner you are is fanciful Emotions matter
and occasionally damaging. For example, if a
learner mistakenly assumes that VAK is like your
blood group, something that you are stuck with Interest in memory
for life, then motivation to learn to play a musical
instrument may vanish if a low auditory score
Importance of demonstration
is ‘measured’.
The interesting thing about VAK is that it Reflection
reminds us of the importance of understanding
our senses and paying much more attention to You can accelerate your
how we give out and take in data – something learning
34 Training Journal July 2005
about which neuroscience has made us much more aware.
But though it may give individuals insights about how they
prefer to take in data in certain circumstances, VAK is not a
learning style.
Think about it for a moment. Why do most people end up
saying that they are kinaesthetic learners? Because then they
are likely to be using all of the senses rather than just the one
or two involved in visual or auditory modes.
Our left brains are logical and our right brains
are creative
While there are two hemispheres in the brain, most brain
activities involve both. This artificial division of the brain into
two halves is largely an invention of pop psychologists. So
while it certainly helps to sell books about the eternal struggle
between the sexes, there is little scientific basis to the claim and
it is not clear what the implications for learners are.
Mozart makes you smarter
The claims for baroque music are not proven. Apparently it
improves test scores in mathematics and, if played to your young
child, will ensure that you bring up a genius. Music has many
Validity Unique to AL?
Mostly
VAK are not learning styles. Helpful if used to aid
understanding the range of senses/data input methods. Mostly
Damaging if leading to limited view of self as a learner.
General consensus that this is broadly true and helpful
if used as means of expanding repertoire of learner No
and learner self-awareness.
Technically true (brains have two hemispheres) but
implied separation of hemisphere functions is largely Mostly
false and unhelpful.
Unproven. While music affects mood and pace
(sometimes), claims for its impact on performance are Yes
unproven.
Mind and body, intellect and emotions – helpful to take
No
a holistic approach and supported by science.
Increasing evidence to show that this is a beneficial
state to be in when learning, but human brain can (and No
needs to) perform well under stress.
Good literature in psychology and latterly neuroscience
No
in support of this.
Disputed area, but consensus probably in favour of this.
Helpful for mind-set, unhelpful if it becomes a bogus No
pseudo-psycho-metric.
Evidence to support this from all quarters, including
long-term impact on immune system from negative No
emotions.
A curate’s egg. Some sound principles (primacy/recency No, though emphasis
for eg) but over-emphasis on tricks and tips. on memory triggers is
For many aspects of skill and process learning this is
No
true.
Lots of good science. No
A paradox: acceleration can be both helpful and
No
counter-productive. It depends!
effects on us, mainly as a mood influencer, but there is scant
evidence for its impact on performance.
Memory happens in the hippocampus
Everyone got very excited when it was thought that the
hippocampus areas of the brains of London taxi drivers were
larger than ordinary people. At last, it seemed, the source of
memory had been located. Indeed, some AL literature subjects
the learner to a sort of ‘naming of brain parts’ experience, in
which you are invited to play trivial pursuits with the geography
of your brain. This is as silly as assuming that the only method of
improving your memory is to reduce everything to acronyms.
As well as drawing from neuro-science, AL has also absorbed
new thinking from psychology, principally in describing
intelligence. Following on from Howard Gardner’s thinking,
much emphasis is placed on the eight intelligences that form
part of this approach. It is not uncommon for some kind of
assessment of each of these eight intelligences to form part
of the learning process. As a consequence you become
temporarily labelled as smart at ‘intrapersonal’ intelligence
and less than smart at, say, ‘bodily-kinesthetic intelligence’.
As to whether or not this is in any way helpful, the jury is
very much out. And at the same time, there is often a fairly
slavish adherence to Daniel Goleman’s interpretation of
emotional intelligence.
The good science
Enough of the flaws! There is much that is good and scientifically
proven in AL. Notice that I say ‘some approaches’ because
there is simply no way of knowing what different advocates
think and practise.
Mind and body are involved
That learning involves more than your head is well documented.
However, the degree to which the expression ‘whole-brained
learning’ is in any way meaningful is not proven.
The relaxed/alert state
There is good evidence that, for creative learning to be most
effective, you need sufficient levels of arousal to be alert but not
to be too stressed to be relaxed. So this is a helpful concept.
Where it can stray into neuro-babble is when assertions are
made about brain waves or when it is implied that all stress
is bad for learners. Work by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi3 on the
state of flow4 also corroborates this.
The importance of the engagement process
Much evidence is placed in AL on the need for learners to
connect with their learning, by giving them the ‘big picture’ of
what is to come, making the process active and ‘waking up’
learners. All of this is good stuff, drawing on sound educational
theory (being explicit about learning objectives, for example),
on notions of experiential learning, for example as espoused
by David Kolb and Kurt Lewin, and the psychological literature
on states of arousal.
We all have individual learning styles
In a recent and very sceptical review of learning styles
by Frank Coffield4, an amazing array of approaches was
described, including:
• Allinson and Hayes’ Cognitive Styles Index
• Apter’s Motivational Style Profile
• Dunn and Dunn’s Learning Styles
• Entwistle’s Approaches and Study Skills Inventory
for Students
• Gregorc’s Styles Delineators
• Herrmann’s Brain Dominance Instrument
• Honey and Mumford’s Learning Styles
• Jackson’s Learning Styles Profiler
• Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory
• Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
• Rider’s Cognitive Styles Analysis
• Sternberg’s Thinking Styles Inventory
• Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles
The science of learning styles seems to suggest that:
➜ as a result of being individuals, we have different
underlying personalities
➜ learning styles are not fixed
➜ VAK is not a learning style but a way of describing
data input
➜ effective learners learn to be effective in a range of
situations and using a range of different styles.
We have multiple intelligences
There has been a big debate about Howard Gardner’s radical
view of intelligence ever since it was first suggested. Not all
psychologists or educationalists agree with him for a variety
of reasons. At issue are the cultural variables behind the eight
categories of intelligence, the way that each of them is not distinct
enough, and the way talents and intelligences are confounded.
However, a consensus seems to be emerging that:
➜ IQ is discredited
➜ it is likely that, in conceptualising intelligence, it is
helpful to think about it as a much broader concept
than IQ
So, if you are asked to identify which of your eight
intelligences is strong and which are weak in an AL session,
you are probably wasting your time! But if, by thinking about
talent in this way, you start to see your job as a trainer or a
learner as hunting out the areas of your undeveloped potential,
it is probably a helpful idea.
The emotional elements
That emotions are hugely important in all stages of learning
and that there is no simple emotional/cognitive divide
is widely accepted. But we are only just at the foothills of
our journey to understand their specific impact on memory
(both embedding and recall), on performance under stress, and
on resilience.
An interest in memory
Over the last few decades, Tony Buzan has arguably been the
pioneer in this field. AL has absorbed much of his thinking. The
use of mind maps and other memory techniques undoubtedly
aids the learning process for many people. The danger here is
that the emphasis can easily be on factual recall rather than on
the transfer of important learning processes. ➨
July 2005 Training Journal 35
An interest in music
The Mozart effect is simply unproven, as is much that is alleged
with regard to the power of music. What is not disputed is
music’s undoubted impact on our mood and its legitimate place
in learning.
The importance of demonstration
Proving that you know something by doing it is well-founded.
There is a growing body of literature about the importance
of certain kinds of practice if you want to become good
at something.
The need to reflect and consolidate
This is soundly based in psychology and educational theory.
You can learn faster
Of course you can! What used to take three years can now
be done in one. There are efficiency gains to be found in all
human activities. The big question is whether you want to learn
faster or whether, as many of us believe, you need to learn
slower in many situations where complex issues are at stake.
The verdict
Where does this leave us? My conclusions are as follows.
➜ AL is not a unified, or coherent set of theories or
practices.
36 Training Journal July 2005
➜ Much of what is undertaken in its name is soundly
based and helpful to learners.
➜ A considerable amount of its thinking is conjecture
or learning ‘spin’, much of it benign. Such tenuous
connection with scientific evidence is potentially
counter-productive.
Where AL works best in practice in my experience is where
the practitioner effectively redefines the concept so that it simply
becomes a synonym for ‘effective modern learning methods’.
Alistair Smith at Alite, Kimberley Hare at Kaisen Training and
Suzanne Hitchen at Instep UK all come to mind as exemplary
practitioners of this approach.
The author of this article can be contacted at bill@bill-lucas.com or visit
www.bill-lucas.com
References
1. Georgi Lozanov, Suggestology and Outlines of Suggestopedy, Gordon and
Breach, 1978.
2. Howard Gardner, Frames of mind; the theory of multiple intelligences,
Fontana Press, 1993.
3. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Creativity; flow and the psychology of discovery
and invention, Harper Collins, 1996.
4. Frank Coffield et al, Should we be using learning styles; what research has
to say to practice, Learning and Skills Development Agency, 2004.