Oh my, Dale's Cone is not a Cone but a Crock

By the way, if you are reading this at http://www.myoutofcontrolteen.com/, then they are stealing my content. You can read the original post at I Speak of Dreams,  http://lizditz.typepad.com/

Patrick Douglas Crispen, who writes an internet guide called the Tourbus,
writes about the idea called "Dale's Cone":

There is a concept in education called "Dale's Cone of Experience" that states that people generally remember:

10% of what they read
20% of what they hear
30% of what they see
50% of what they hear and see
70% of what they say or write
90% of what they as they do a thing

And it is a complete and total fraud.

Since many Tourbus riders are also educators or librarians, I thought I'd don my powder blue academic hood [see http://tinyurl.com/qjubv ] and share with you some interesting academic research.  There is a concept in education called "Dale's Cone of Experience" that states that people generally remember:

10% of what they read 20% of what they hear 30% of what they see 50% of what they hear and see 70% of what they say or write 90% of what they as they do a thing

Often displayed graphically as a cone -- see http://teacherworld.com/dalescone.gif -- Dale's Cone has had a profound impact on the way we teach both children and adults.

And it is a complete and total fraud.

No, really.  Will Thalheimer at Work-Learning Research delved into Dale's Cone and discovered that:

1. While Edgar Dale indeed did indeed create a model of the concreteness of various audio-visual material back in 1946, the model contained no numbers and no research was conducted to create the model.  Dale's Cone was just a hunch, albeit an educated hunch, one that Dale warned shouldn't be taken too literally.

2. The percentages -- 'people generally remember 10% of what they read' and so on -- were most likely added to Dale's Cone by an employee of the Mobil Oil company in the late 1960s.  These percentages have since been discredited.

You can see Thalheimer's complete report online at

http://www.work-learning.com/chigraph.htm

It's an eye-opening read, especially if you're an educator, librarian or trainer.  Let me also put in a plug for Thalheimer's blog at

http://www.willatworklearning.com/

While I've known about Thalheimer's investigation into Dale's Cone for a couple of years now, I've only recently discovered his blog. It contains a collection of "research-based commentary on learning, performance, and the industry thereof."

You should also visit the internet home of the Tourbus and take a look around.  Or if you are pressed for time, The Best of Everything -- http://www.InternetTourbus.com/best.html

Comments

[Reg]

Liz,
This is a great bit.
But to me, the sad part is,Tourbus probably just posted something they found listed elsewhere. It is amazing how many articles I find that are just rewriting someone elses work. And without even checking out the value of the work they copy.
I find my stuff posted in a lot of strange places (I know you do too) and I know the publisher hasn't checked out my work because they haven't contacted me and I don't usually post my sources in my pieces.

[Steve Harmon]

(I realize that is quite an old post, but I stumbled across it and thought I would leave a response for other passersby).

Actually Dale's Cone of Experience remains a valid and valuable representation of learning and media, particularly when matched with other developmental theories of learning (i.e. Bruner). What you are speaking against (the 10% of what they read, etc) is not and has never been a part of Dale's orignal work (as you mention yourself). Even Thalheimer notes that he is addressing "a bastardization of Dale's work."
So be cautious of condemning Dale's Cone when the argument is actually against something else.