Note. The learning pyramid is not backed by scientific research (the ICAP framework is highly researched and validated). The specific percentages are made up, and the original "Cone of Experience" by Edgar Dale never included numbers or retention rates at all. However, as you noted, it remains a highly useful framework for structuring active learning strategies.
Note. While the Learning Pyramid's retention percentages (5% for lectures to 90% for teaching others) lack scientific validation and shouldn't be taken as fixed rules, its basic concept serves as a useful reminder that active engagement tends to promote deeper learning than passive reception. Like Bloom's Taxonomy, it suggests a helpful progression from basic knowledge acquisition to more complex learning activities, though instructors should focus on choosing methods that best suit their specific learning objectives rather than adhering to any rigid hierarchy.