Visual, auditory, and kinesthetic (the hands on) are often referred to as learning modalities rather than style and there was a great summary of research on them in The American Educator that basically reported that matching modalities doesn't improve student performance because the modality has to match the content. For example, you have to read to learn to read (visual). You can't become a lab expert without performing the lab experiments (kinesthetic and different from learning the theories via texts).
Most type ed experts consider S and N of great importance, as Didums pointed out. I find the next most important is E and I when training classroom teachers because I teachers see E behavior as misbehavior. E teachers see I behavior as lack of motivation (those are generalizations but ones that are backed up by tons of teacher interviews). ALL the preferences matter but teachers can't plan for 16 types right off the bat and suggesting that they should sends them running for the exit doors.
I guess I emphasize figuring out strategies for when you have to work outside your comfort zone, since anyone who goes very far in education will need to do so. For example, I flunked the freshman chem titration lab 22 times--it requires Se and I"m dominant Ni. It's kinesthetic and I'm visual. I had to learn to turn off Ne completely by counting drops out loud, marking them off, etc., to pass it--and we had to pass 8 such labs with no less than an A to pass Freshman Chem, so I was motivated!
I was always fascinated by the Dalcroze eurhythmics training method and the Kodaly system, which advocated universal musical education... musical training is a great boost to other kinds of knowledge-acquisition, particularly in maths... and aside from sports, there are few disciplines as mind-body involved as music and dance...
Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.
Realize us, Madman!
I razed a slum, Amen.
Visual and hands-on. I, just like Substitute, have terrible verbal memory and sometimes even forget what we're talking about as we're talking about it.
By myself. Though I do like classroom settings and discussions, provided it's after I've learned the material well enough to be confident in a discussion. Or provided I've progressed enough in whatever I've been working on for a critique to make sense.
Traditional class. Taking something online would only have me zoning out and going and messing around on the internet instead of "being in class."
A little of both. I like to work at my own pace, but I also NEED deadlines or else I won't bother to do a good job of anything. At the same time, what I don't need is someone micromanaging me. If I get that, I lock up and do exactly what the micromanager doesn't want me to do. (Probably in some passive aggressive attempt to regain control over work that is mine and not theirs.)
"I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."
Going to an Alternative high school where the teachers each had a different style or teaching helped me strengthen where I was work and keep my skills up is what I was proficent and exceled in. So I'd have to say I'd do well in any style as long as I have my Zune playing my Metal playlist.
I am Visual and Kinesthetic. Visual presentation of concepts is very important for me to learn theory. Symbolic presentation (as in using equations) is second best. Words in english leave too much ambiguity for my tastes.
I like hands on learning. I hate learning something and not applying it in some way. I like to see things work in the real world. I am somewhat lazy however. So the hands-on learning ought not take too much energy or be tedious.
I am generally a reflectve learner, I like to learn my thinking for log times about the concepts I am learning--playign with them in my head, and dreaming up things to do.
I am a global learner. I like to see the big-picture and connections to other subjects/concepts. I usual find sequences of material to be rather arbritrary.
I understand things more quickly when presented in a deductive format, but I remember things longer when concepts are taught inductively. So a good mix is probably best. Inductive followed by deductive followed by Inductive feels like the most effective for me.
I learn a lot more on my own than in a guided format. Infact, even in the guided formats, I was most successful when the guided format is so slow that I've done my full exploration by them we move modules or subjects.
I like discussion after I've done a lot of thinking about subjects. So solatary work followed by group work is best for me.
Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future. Robot Fusion
"As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
"[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
"[P]etabytes of  data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield
Visual (includes reading) v. auditory v. hands on learning
Visual and auditory
Large group, small group, just you and the teacher, learning on your own
Definitely Learning on my own! With a teacher could also be good.
on line class v. traditional class
No class. Just regular meetings with the professor/expert.
learn at your own pace v. guided learning (must stick to set schedule)
Worst case scenario: large class with no set schedule, little teacher interaction one on one, and no regular testing.
hoarding time and space
A single event can awaken within us a stranger totally unknown to us. To live is to be slowly born.
— Antoine de Saint-Exupery