Definitions of Learning Styles and the Kolb Model
According to Kolb (1984) learning styles are habitual patterns of learning acquired over the entire life cycle which lead people to prefer certain kinds of learning environments over others. Howard Gardner (1993) likewise describes learning styles as processing preferences which are automatic and based upon habituation of routines. In recent years interest in learning styles has increased dramatically; we know much more about how the brain works, and research on collaborative learning and learning communities has shown that these types of environments are effective for enhancing learning. A review of the literature (e.g., Busato, Prins, Elshout, & Hamaker, 1998) shows numerous descriptions of learning styles and various terminology with little cohesiveness or standardization. Many educators are familiar with the categories of visual, auditory, and tactile preferences for learning. This module, however, uses Kolb’s Learning Styles Inventory (1984) as its model.
Kolb’s model is built on the premise that all people perceive and process new information using four primary learning abilities (feeling, thinking, watching, and doing); these are grouped into “dialectically opposed” pairs (feeling or thinking, watching or doing). We perceive new stimuli by either feeling or thinking; we process new information by either watching or doing. Kolb says that the abilities in each pair are “dialectally opposed,” meaning that in choosing one mode of operating over another, the learner is forced into an internal dialectic or debate. The more we make the same choices, our internal debates gradually become less fiercely contested and our choices solidify into habits. For example, an individual, once having become habituated to a style, may approach almost all new learning situations by thinking and watching.
No matter what the learning style, all adult learners engage in a learning cycle in which they begin by taking in immediate, concrete experiences, they then mentally step back to a position in which they observe and reflect upon these experiences; they assimilate and distill these ideas into abstract concepts which they can then actively test to verify or solidify their understanding or mental model. This cycle reflected in Table 1 can continue indefinitely, especially if realistic performance assessment is used, because each sequence produces new opportunities, experiences, and concepts that can be processed at higher and higher levels of thinking.
In Kolb’s model, individuals form their preferred learning styles by habit; by repeatedly making choices over time, whether to perceive by thinking or feeling, and whether to process by watching or doing. According to the model, individuals ultimately settle into one of four learning styles, diverging, assimilating, converging, and accommodating.
These are described in the following paragraphs.
Diverging learners (CE/RO) combine what they gain through concrete experience with reflective observation. Diverging learners usually prefer to work in groups. They tend to listen with an open mind, and readily receive personalized feedback. They view things from diverging perspectives. They are sensitive, and prefer to watch rather than do, preferring to gather information and use imagination to solve problems. They are best at viewing concrete situations from several different viewpoints, so they are best at brainstorming or artistic expression.
Assimilating learners (AC/RO) combine reflective observation with abstract conceptualizing. They understand a wide range of ideas and organize them into concise logical forms. They are less focused on people and are more drawn to ideas and concepts. These people value logic over practicality, so they require good clear explanations rather than practical opportunity. This style is common among people who choose careers in information and science. In formal learning situations, people with this style prefer readings, lectures, exploring analytical models, and having time to think things through.
Converging learners (AC/AE) combine abstract conceptualizing with active experimentation. They find practical uses for ideas and theories; they like technical tasks and problems rather than social and interpersonal experiences; they prefer to experiment with new ideas, simulations, laboratory assignments, and practical applications. They are often drawn to specialist and technology careers. People with a converging style like to experiment with new ideas, to do simulations, and to work with practical applications.
Accommodating learners (CE/AE) prefer actively experimenting and learning through concrete experiences. They prefer hands-on-learning, enjoy carrying out plans, and involving themselves in new and challenging experiences. They act on their intuition rather than using logical analysis, and rely on other people’s analysis more than their own technical analysis. This learning style is prevalent and useful in roles requiring action and initiative. They like to work in teams to test different approaches to get work done. They set targets and actively work in the field trying different ways to achieve an objective. Careers in marketing and sales tend to fit well for people who learn in this way.
Components of Learning Styles
Kolb’s model is complemented by others reviewed by Busato, Prins, Elshout, and Hamaker (1998) who concluded that learning styles typically have four components: processing strategies, regulation strategies, mental models of learning, and learning orientations. Processing strategies consist of cognitive activities used to process information and to obtain learning results. Regulation strategies are methods used to monitor and control the processing strategies in order to effectively leverage the learning process (2.2.7 Understanding Motivation and Self-Regulation Theories). Mental models of learning are the strategies that are either eliminated or retained due to the success and/or failure of academic performance and learning outcomes. Learning orientations are the culmination of expectations and doubts learners experience during their life cycle. These four processes are factors that interact to produce the kinds of consistent learning style patterns that Kolb and others have described. For example, a learner who prefers Kolb’s active experimentation style may tend to get good results when he or she uses certain cognitive domain learning skills. This person has probably learned to regulate these strategies by means of immediate assessment of results. This person attains a clear mental understanding of what is happening and why, and, having enjoyed a long history of success, expects to continue to be able to be an effective learner. Such an individual is more likely to become a self-grower than someone who tends to focus on concrete experience.
Learning Styles and Learning Environments
Students may prefer to learn by using a specific learning style that has been successful in the past. Adult learners, especially, may experience dissonance and a disruption of their learning cycle if they are asked to adapt to a new or unfamiliar learning environment. Because involvement in a different learning style from one’s own may be disorienting at first, it is best if one has ample opportunities to practice followed by supportive feedback and assessment. Because life requires a broad range of competencies, it should be the goal of both faculty and students to improve academic performance using non-preferred learning styles. If a student has failed while trying to use a non-preferred learning style in a challenging learning environment, the emotional experience may have a long-term negative influence on confidence and self-concept.
Educators and learners alike will be better able to manage learning styles within specific learning contexts if the styles are regarded as flexible, remembering that these are only preferences that result from experience. Assessment is the key process for increasing student success and for producing in students a meta-cognitive awareness of how their performance might be adjusted for different tasks and environments. At the beginning of a course, an educator will want to make an initial assessment of the variations in background and learner style that will need to be attended to. This information can be gathered through exercises that feature introductions and which encourage students to share their interests, readiness to learn, and preferred types of learning situations or activities. At the midpoint of the term further information is available from the assessment and evaluation of several performances. Asking students to identify their strengths and areas of improvement will provide insights about their growth in self-awareness about their learning style. As various types of learning opportunities and contexts are provided throughout a course it becomes increasing feasible to have the learners self-assess their competencies and barriers for handling a variety of learning challenges.
Using Challenge to “Leverage” Learning Styles
To help learners engage in their non-preferred learning styles, educators should set expectations and challenges that students are capable of meeting (4.3.4 The Accelerator Model). It is helpful to design curricula and activities with performance expectations that are high enough to create dissonance and which require the use of different learning styles during every class period. Students who have been unsuccessful with a learning style in the past will have the propensity to withdraw or not attempt to engage in a new learning style. Therefore an instructor must be on the lookout for students who “check-out,” and be prepared to provide such students with timely and constructive feedback when they display unsuccessful behaviors. Often, if the team members have varied learning styles, team activities are an effective strategy to overcome resistance to trying new learning strategies. The communication process within a team and the different results from other teams help all learners, including the facilitator, to discover the creative potential of a learning community (3.1.2 Introduction to Learning Communities).
Table 2 includes practical strategies that educators might use to effectively challenge learners to use non-preferred styles. Flexibility, context, and self-management are consistent with the learning style components that Busata et al. (1998) identified. Early assessment of learning style variations enables an educator to plan activities that are likely to promote growth in the affective domain skills such as persisting, believing in oneself, recognizing sources of dissonance, and preparing for future emotions. As learners discover how to predict their emotional reactions to new challenges they can form increasingly realistic meta-cognitive understanding of how their learning strategies match various kinds of challenges.
Strategies for Learning Styles
Process Education tools and practices lend themselves readily to the design and implementation of curricula that take into account these various learning styles. Table 3 provides a sampling of ways that an instructor might begin to map learning experiences into the learning activity choices so they will provide both familiar starting points and challenges for the differing styles of learners described above in the Kolb model.
Because teams are so much a part of a Process Education classroom, it is important for the instructor to determine the learning styles of the students prior to forming teams. Whenever possible it is best to form teams that include a variety of learning styles and to help group members come to appreciate the skills and perspectives of the respective group members. If the instructor is alert to the specific styles of given learners, he or she will be better able to constructively intervene as certain learners will be predictably stronger at certain stages of the groups’ learning and development than will be those with other learning styles. If the instructor is sensitive enough to match the learner style to the tasks of a group at a given period of time, the instructor can foster the self-confidence of the individual learners and may lead learners to have a greater appreciation of one another’s gifts, thus adding to the cohesiveness and productivity of the group.
Authenticity of the Instructor and Learning
The value of understanding individual learning styles is predicated on the authenticity and genuineness of educators, who should take the initiative in displaying congruent emotions during the learning process. Students need to see the “humanness” of the instructor rather than see him or her as just a conveyor of information and knowledge. Rogers (1980) emphasized that “an empathic way of being can be learned from empathic persons.” This suggests that as facilitators of academic performance, educators must deal with individual frailties, nuances, and idiosyncrasies in ways that will allow for individual growth, faculty/student trust, student/student trust, and an atmosphere of risk-taking (3.2.2 Profile of a Quality Facilitator). Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (2005) argue that the educator must also recognize and genuinely accept students who cope by rationalizing and intellectualizing as much as he or she accepts students who express deep-seated feelings. Motivation to learn encompasses a myriad of factors; allowing students to feel authentic and establishing a special bond of trust in the learning environment will enhance the overall academic performance of the student (4.2.1 Overview of Mentoring).
Concluding Thoughts
It is advantageous for educators to recognize the various learning style patterns and preferences and to learn how to leverage these to increase the academic performance of learners. By recognizing and exploring environmental and situational conditions, both faculty and students will be better able to embrace new learning experiences by strengthening non-preferred learning styles and personality preferences. Educators who show authenticity in their manner of relating to each learner will be able to help most learners through the emotional ups and downs associated with learning.
References
Busato, V., Prins, F., Elshout, J., & Hamaker, C. (1998). Learning styles: A cross sectional and longitudinal study in higher education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68. 427-441.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., III, & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
|
Ability |
Action Type |
Stage of learning cycle |
Characteristics of ability and cycle |
|
Feel |
Perceive |
Concrete experiencing |
Experience tangible qualities, rely on senses and feelings; become immersed in concrete reality |
|
Watch |
Process |
Reflective observation |
Carefully watch others involved and reflect |
|
Think |
Perceive |
Abstract conceptualizing |
Think about experience, analyze it, and systematically plan rather than using only sensing |
|
Do |
Process |
Active experimentation |
Engage in action consistent with perceptions and understanding |
|
Beginning of Course |
Throughout a Course |
End of Course |
|
|
Flexibility Challenge |
Assign a guided- discovery activity that requires quick use of text and team resources |
Engage students by using activities that involve various learning strategies |
Require a growth report of students’ success in expanding their comfort with various types of non-preferred activities |
|
Contextual Challenge |
Introduce assignments that are challenging but which allow learners to stay with preferred learning style |
Use different types of activities that require students to transfer knowledge and skills to new applications |
For a course capstone experience, use an unexpected context challenge, e.g., present a novel application of a process learned earlier |
|
Management of Learning Style |
Self-assess outcomes from known strategies and learning methodologies that have proven successful |
Use the accelerator model to challenge performance at an uncomfortable level and then debrief through assessment and planning for future strategies |
Require a growth report on self-assessment insights gained from efforts during the course to become emotionally more comfortable with using multiple learning styles |
|
Lecture-based Activities |
Lab-based Activities |
Group-related Activities |
|
|
CE/AE Doing and feeling Accommodating |
By disclosing own learning style, a teacher can model cooperation and collaboration in a quality learning environment; useful knowledge is communal and universal |
Guided-inquiry questions with projects Direct involvement in activities Self-assessments |
Team learning; brainstorming; experiences of both effectual and ineffectual group communication; assessment of skills in a team role |
|
AC/RO Watching and thinking Assimilating |
Recognition of discrepancies between prior understanding and new knowledge; pose questions designed to elevate the level of knowledge; |
Identification of key concepts, processes, and tools, and understanding why they fit the objectives of lab activities |
Self-assessment of the influence of personality and learning style on team process; assessing the influence of learning style variations on performance |
|
AC/AE Doing and thinking Converging |
Assess one’s analysis and synthesis skills in the development of papers and other course products |
Activity designs include the reason for the activity as part of the introduction for every activity Frequent assessments of activities and one’s own performance |
Forming teams with learning style variation; gathering insights from teams |
|
CE/RO Feeling and watching Diverging |
Guided-inquiry learning Team processing following brief lectures |
Demonstrate novel variations of a process; identify unknowns |
Set time or quality standards to challenge other teams |