There is no evidence presented in this article. At all. It has no references other than links to articles that show "learning styles" are a myth.

This is a problem because there is real scientific evidence showing that people do not have specific learning styles.

The ideas that the author proposes center around "do you want to" and "do you like". Don't you get people telling you that they prefer "kinesthetic learning" because they "like it" better? How does this differ?

The conversation needs to focus around *what methods are effective for learning* and *what makes them effective*. The rest is fluff, getting ready to be debunked next.

I disagree with the comments about "metacognition"... I agree that is critical, but I don't see any sign that this article is addressing that. Metacognition means thinking about what worked and what did not work while you were/are trying to learn. The only sign of that in this article is the one sentence, "Understand what works for you," that refers to choosing one of the wants or likes from the list.