A few days ago, my (very effective*, insightful*, and experienced*) german teacher asked us to take a learning styles quiz so she could better know how we learned and how best to teach us. The quiz asked only 20 questions of such nature as, “would you rather read something or have something read aloud to you?”, and apparently it was supposed to tell us precisely which methods of learning would produce the best results for us (ie. Tactile, visual, or auditory learning). The main problem i have with this is that it is designed so that random answers to questions will produce seemingly worthwhile and meaninful results, along with suggestions “tailored to your style” on how you should learn. A 20-question quiz has no idea who you are in real life, nor does it have the authority to tell you exactly how you learn or how you should study. If one answers these questions truthfully or randomly, the website will spit out what it thinks you are like, and then it gives the teacher very narrow fields of view about large swaths of diverse people with diverse learning styles. No teacher has ever made their teaching more effective by asking their students to take a 20-question subjective quiz, nor will there be any. The same problem arises with similar personality tests such as the Myers-Briggs and the Jungs test that asks simple, subjective questions like, “are you more in-the-clouds or down-to-earth?” And spits out what it thinks your personality is and how you should respond to different things. These tests don’t actually model, predict, or explain the complexity of human interaction as we experience it, and actually lead people to constrict their own lifestyles to fit what a computer says they should be like. Our human experience should be diverse, rich, and complex, not boring, predictable, and simple like a computer would say it should be like. Personality tests are now making our world into a living recreation of the thinkings of a computer. Who wants to live like that?