Beginning in the late 1980s and early 1990s, higher education was swept up in the theoretical phenomena of mastery learning, cooperative learning, and small-group learning. Professors, instructors, and teachers at the K-12 level became facilitators, guides, supervisors, counselors, and advocates for all things team and group. The thought of a brilliant lecturer reaching a student was antithetical to learning theory. Evaluations of teaching effectiveness focused on classroom engagement, as measured by all things team and group. Perhaps the time has come to examine the question again: would it be in students' best interests to bring back the lone teacher, that sage on the stage? Such a proposition seems heretical at this point in higher education because the lecturer has been portrayed as an uncaring Luddite who needs to be moved along into retirement in spite of pension plan problems. Current research has revealed flaws in theory and learning results and calls for a reexamination, as well as a new perspective, on what has been accepted as settled science in education. This article examines how and why learning styles research moved preferred instructional methodology from the "sage on the stage" approach to the "guide on the side." Following this historical perspective is a discussion of the theoretical and methodological flaws that were used to establish learning-style theory, which was then used as the foundation for that transition. Finally, the article proposes a less theoretical and more instructor-centric approach to learning achievement by employing a more results-oriented approach, specifically in the business law/legal environment/business ethics areas of instruction. (Contains 2 figures and 134 footnotes.)