Learning Pyramid

Introduction

• Also known as:
  • Cone of Learning
  • Learning Cone
  • Cone of Retention
  • Pyramid of Learning
  • Pyramid of Retention
• Represents degrees of retention from different learning types.

History

• Originated in the 1954 book "Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching."
• Developed by National Training Laboratories Institute in the 1960s.
• Original research by NTL is lost, but widely referenced.

Learning Pyramid Model

• Describes retention rates for different learning activities:
  • 90%: Teach someone else/use immediately.
  • 75%: Practice what one learned.
  • 50%: Engage in a group discussion.
  • 30%: Watch a demonstration.
  • 20%: Watch audiovisual.
  • 10%: Read.
  • 5%: Listen to a lecture.

Criticisms

• Criticized for inconsistencies with research and methodology issues.
• Edgar Dale's Cone of Experience is an early criticized version.
• Original NTL study's methodology is unknown and the results considered unreliable.

References

• Letrud, Kre (2012), "A rebuttal of NTL Institute's learning pyramid," Education (133): 117-124.
• Masters, Ken (2020), "Edgar Dale's Pyramid of Learning in medical education: Further expansion of the myth," Medical Education.
• Subramony, D.P. (2003), "Dales Cone revisited: Critically examining the misapplication of a nebulous theory to guide practice."
• Molenda, M. (2004), "Cone of experience."
• Lalley, J. P. & Miller, R.H. (2007): "The learning pyramid: Does it point teachers in the right direction?" Education 128(1):64-79.