In this short blog post we’re doing our second mythbusters session! Let’s not just accept something because it’s been said so many times that most people believe it. We’re going to delve deeper and explore the facts. So, let’s explore the cone of learning and the suggestion that people only retain 20% of what they hear, compared with 90% of what they do!
Most people have heard some kind of quote around how much information people retain from reading, hearing, and doing; and it all sounds quite plausible. You might have seen the cone of learning or the cone of experience, or the learning pyramid – which all refer to the same principle. And you might have thought – fair enough – as an enabler of change I need to work on helping people to read, discuss and do, as this is the ultimate in helping people retain information.
This cone was originally developed by Edgar Dale back in 1946. He was an American educator who developed the cone as part of his book on how to incorporate audio-visual materials into the classroom learning experience. However Dale did not include any numbers on his cone and warned his readers not to take the cone too literally!
Unfortunately, someone at sometime, decided to add some numbers to this diagram – perhaps to make it more interesting.
In fact there is no research that supports the claim that people only remember a certain percentage of anything they have learnt. And secondly, as some researchers who wrote an article debunking this said, all the numbers are divisible by 5 or 10 and results are rarely that neat!
Over the years, beginning in 1971, there have been attempts to debunk this myth. The problem though, is that people seem determined to use the false information! In fact there are several excellent papers outlining the details of why this is indeed a myth, and as usual, we’ll provide links to these below.
Well, you’ve read our thoughts, now we’d like to hear yours! Add a comment below and tell us if there’s something you’d like us to mythbust! We don’t want this to be just a one-way conversation – join in by sharing your thoughts and ideas with us!
Resources
Mythical retention data and the corrupted cone: https://www.worklearning.com/2015/01/05/mythical-retention-data-the-corrupted-cone/
The corrupted cone of experience: https://sites.google.com/site/thecorruptedconeoflearning/home
Edgar Dale (1946). Audio-visual methods in teaching. Dryden Press, 1946. 534 pages
Subramony, D., Molenda, M., Betrus, A., and Thalheimer, W. (2014). The Mythical Retention Chart and the Corruption of Dale’s Cone of Experience. Educational Technology, Nov/Dec 2014, 54(6), 6-16.
Subramony, D., Molenda, M., Betrus, A., and Thalheimer, W. (2014). Previous Attempts to Debunk the Mythical Retention Chart and Corrupted Dale’s Cone. Educational Technology, Nov/Dec 2014, 54(6), 17-21.
Subramony, D., Molenda, M., Betrus, A., and Thalheimer, W. (2014). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: A Bibliographic Essay on the Corrupted Cone. Educational Technology, Nov/Dec 2014, 54(6), 22-31.
Subramony, D., Molenda, M., Betrus, A., and Thalheimer, W. (2014). Timeline of the Mythical Retention Chart and Corrupted Dale’s Cone. Educational Technology, Nov/Dec 2014, 54(6), 31-24.
Hello John.
Do you have any thoughts on the 10-20-70 learning and development model?
If we only develop 10% of our knowledge from formal education you could question why we even bother.
I consider formal education to be extremely important!!!
Similar thoughts to the cone of learning?
Thanks
Great question Adrian – I would be interested in the answer as well.
Thanks Michelle, it looks as though there is some interest in this topic for a future episode!
Good question Adrian… instinctively the neat numbers, all divisible by 10, just don’t seem right to me!
There’s much debate around this one as well, nicely summarised by this article: https://www.td.org/insights/70-20-10-where-is-the-evidence
I’ve just reviewed a journal article about how extension practitioners actually learn, so once it’s published we’ll do an episode about it.
Great John. Really enjoy these videos
Here’s a really good LinkedIn article on learning transfer. The author really knows his stuff, and provides good evidence.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/learning-x-transfer-equation-wrong-geoff-rip/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=2022-06-28&utm_campaign=ILP+Insights+-+28+June+2022
Thank you. I like these quick updates via video/audio.
Thanks Rhonda… glad to hear that you’re enjoying them!
This is really quite interesting because I often observe farmers at field days/ short courses when I’ve organised a guest speaker to present on a particular subject, say planned grazing or soil health. Generally speaking none of the participants take notes (where as I’m frantically taking notes so that I can recall details later – I have a sieve-like memory). I do think that the presenters style is essential for info sharing and retention – some talking, some outside walking, and lots of hands-on doing is essential plus simple workshop notes for later reference. I also think it’s important that… Read more »
Good thoughts Sharon, and I agree that it is highly beneficial to have multiple people from the same organisation or farm family attend an event. I’ve sometimes invited a learning buddy to come to a training event with me, so we can talk about the material and how to apply it back in the workplace.