Good teaching is just that.

Think about your typical class of 20 students. You know all of their names, their basic likes/ dislikes, and according to many Best Teaching Practice lists, you should know how they learn. From a quick search online, there are anywhere from 3-7 learning styles. 

If we were to believe that these learning styles were solely the way we learned, I feel that there would be a lot of wasted classroom time as we try to switch gears and tailor instruction individually for each group. The "visual learners" for example, would become disengaged and bored while the "auditory learners" are being catered to. While over learning may occur through such repetitive yet different processes, I believe that making sure the content is presented in a meaningful and sensible manner is the most effective way to teach content. For example, when teaching about color theory (the mixing of primary colors to create secondary colors, for example) I wouldn't just word for word describe what you would see if you happened to mix primary colors, but instead, I would let the students take the paint and manipulate it to see what happens. I think that considering different ways of content delivery for students who end up being lost can be helpful and prove that there may not be just one way to think about answering a question. Students are diverse in how they learn and what background experiences they bring to the table, but according to Willingham, we don't need to categorize students in regards to their learning styles. In the end, good teaching is good teaching. 

Sadly, in college- level classes (and in high school classes too, but I experienced this a lot more in college) you too often see professors just "stand and deliver", lecturing on and on about content. This disengages the student, but also may lose students along the way if the content they're discussing doesn't make sense to just be lectured on about. It's good teaching practice to have variety in pedagogy, benefiting both teacher and students.