I.O.U. – Sometime, maybe in mid-May 2019, I'll develop this page more thoroughly, to show how "The Learning Pyramid" is not based on research, and is not correct. A typical "Learning Pyramid" claim is that "we remember only 10% of what we "learn" by READING, but this increases to 90% when we TEACH IT."
But this claim is unwarranted and is wrong. Here is a brief description quoted from David Jones in The learning pyramid: true, false, hoax or myth?: "I don’t believe it is useful in guiding the design of learning and teaching, in fact, I believe it to be destructive. It aims to provide a simplistic basis [but it's wrong] on which to guide design, when such design should be guided by and engage with a recognition that teaching is complex, difficult and contextual, and can’t be improved by [simplistic] silver bullets."
brief history -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Dale#Cone_of_Experience
DanWilli -- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/03/06/why-the-learning-pyramid-is-wrong/?utm_term=.fc176c8bb953
WillTh - https://www.worklearning.com/2006/05/01/people_remember/
[iou - these pages were found very quickly, and i think i've missed one (found earlier) that i thought was the best brief-yet-thorough summary.]
But... mixed results in results for [the learning pyramid] with search engines -- e.g. google #1 begins with
glowing (google #1 for [the learning pyramid] - https://www.educationcorner.com/the-learning-pyramid.html