Change Theory Matrix
Adapted from Dunn (2002)
This theory of Kolb’s is developed from Piaget’s and Lewin’s theories (Moon, 2004). It is a four- stage process which is continuous and can begin at any one of the stages of the cycle. The learning situation can go through any number of cycles. Learning through concrete experience in practice proceeds to reflective observation. This then goes onto learning through abstract conceptualisation progressing to learning through active experimentation. Moon (1999a) described the same phases of Kolb’s cycle in her own words. Concrete experience was stated to be the having of the experience. The learner then recognises a need to resolve some problem or issue. Clarification of the problem is then undertaken. Reflective observation was described as reviewing and recollecting and reviewing the emotional state and feelings. Processing the knowledge and ideas that she has gathered, the learner makes a final resolution with a change in attitude and action. The action stage corresponds to the active experimentation stage. Many researchers have worked upon and made slight modifications to Kolb’s cycle.
The ability to progress in learning after an experience is the first issue (Moon, 2004). Transfer of the learning to another context may be an issue; Kolb’s cycle is a closed one. How the learning occurs in a formal context is a possible third one.
Evaluation is necessary to conclude whether the learners really absorbed what was taught by the teacher. In olden days learning what the teacher taught did not produce expected results because evaluation or feedback was not the norm. The evaluation session on the following day is the best manner to get a feedback. The learning process should always have the evaluation session to gauge whether the learners have gained the knowledge in the perspective taught by the teacher. The teacher believes her technique of teaching is right till some day she learns she is not. The evaluation would warn the teacher about her techniques. This evaluation phase is not included in Kolb’s cycle as criticized by Moon (2004). In a lecturing class, when learners are silent, it should never be concluded that the learners have understood all to the desired degree. The learners may be confused and may not realize that they have not understood fully as the teacher wanted them to. The evaluation is necessary for modification of the teacher’s method and for checking the level of change of knowledge of the learner. Deep reflection at different stages of the cycle could change the teacher’s methods and learner’s change or increase in knowledge. Action learning techniques would help shift the individualistic viewpoint of experiential learning to involve others.
Transferring knowledge gained from the educational context to the work situation is a significant issue. Humans are considered to be experts at transferring knowledge, ideas and skill from one setting to another (Bennett, 2000 cited in Moon, 2004). The language of transfer will be instilled in the learners at the educational discourse itself. How best to maximize and facilitate the transfer should be the aim of the teacher and the learner: the expected outcome should be solicited (Moon, 2004).
Effective learning and transfer also requires learning within the same context as the workplace. (Wallace, 1996). Transferring the learning from a different context into a workplace context requires immense effort. Integration of experiential learning into workplace practice could be assisted by short course training (Moon, 2004). The learner has to develop an awareness of his current workplace. Relating the new learning to his work functions after clarifying it is the next step. Then he needs to integrate the two. Using imagination to foresee the nature of an improved practice, the learner finds answers to how he can change his practice (Moon, 2004).
Experiential learning is an experience which is not mediated by a teacher; direct experience forms the material of learning (Moon, 2004). There is an active phase, scope for reflection, some feedback and an intention to learn. The intention to learn need not be found in other daily forms of learning.
The Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory measures the individual learning preferences (Marion, 2001). Nine rows of four alternative adjectives (in homogeneous learning mode columns), which rank from 1 (low) to 4 (high) are found in the inventory (Atkinson, 1991). Redesigning his inventory twice, once in 1985, and then in 1993, Kolb responded to psychometric criticisms (Marion, 2001). The modification in 1985 provided an LSI-II with twelve sentence openings, each of which had four alternative endings, ranked from 1 to 4 by respondents (Kolb, 1985a, 1985b). Homogeneous learning mode columns were found in the 1985 revision, but the LSI-II endings were given in random order in the 1993 revision (Pickworth & Shoeman, 2000). This last inventory has high face validity.
Kolb’s experiential learning model has been applied in many situations of job and general transfer skills: “job environments (Manring, 1981), worker ability requirements (Fry & Sims, 1981; Sims, 1981), career exploration (Atkinson & Murrell, 1988; Kolb, 1985a), counseling (Atkinson, 1991; Hunt, 1987), action research guidelines (Atkinson, Ennis, & Lloyd, 1994), community college teleconferencing (Dille & Mezack, 1991), testing formats (Holley & Jenkins, 1993), university undergraduate study habits (Nulty & Barrett, 1996), university social work field education (Raschick, Maypole, & Day, 1998), nursing program instruction (McNeal & Dwyer, 1999), on-campus versus off-campus learning (Diaz & Cartnal, 1999), meta-cognitive strategies in self-taught adults (Danis, 1988), graduate-level university concept mapping (Oughton & Reed, 2000), and general classroom learning (Bansenauer, 1996; Hettich, 1993; Smith & Kolb, 1986)” (All as cited in Marion, 2001).
References
Atkinson, G. A. (1991). Kolb’s Learning-Style Inventory: A practitioner’s perspective. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 23, 149-161
Dunn, L. (2002). Theories of Learning, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kolb, D. A. (1985a). Learning-Style Inventory: Self-scoring inventory and interpretation booklet. Boston: McBer & Company.
Kolb, D. A. (1985b). Personal learning guide: Self-study booklet. A personal guide for setting learning goals and learning strategies. Boston: McBer & Company.
Marion, T. (2001).Translating Learning Style Theory into University Teaching Practices: An Article Based on Kolb’s Experiential Learning Model. Journal of College Reading and Learning. Volume: 32. Issue: 1
Moon, J. (2004). A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory and Practice. Routledge: New York
Moon, J. (1999). Reflection in Learning and Professional Development. London: Kogan Page
Pickworth, G. E. & Shoeman, W. J. (2000). The psychometric properties of the Learning Style Inventory and the Learning Style Questionnaire: Two normative measures of learning styles. South African Journal of Psychology, 30(2), p. 44-53.
Wallace, M. (1996). When is experiential learning not experiential learning?. In G.Claxton, T.Atkinson, M.Osborn and M.Wallace (Ed.) Liberating the Learner, London: Routledge