Friends,

As graduate students, we are professionals and specialists in our fields. As such, we are uniquely equipped to pass our knowledge to new learners. The opportunity to teach as graduate students should not be taken for granted. Teaching provides valuable practice for those who will go on to work in academia, and our work is immensely valuable for the learners in our community. As instructors, we strive to deliver information effectively; however, all students process information uniquely. Some would say that all learners have different “styles” based on their ability, background, personality, et cetera. When designing our curricula, we would almost never know our students’ exact, personalized learning preferences. However, we may be able to approximate such preferences by defining a set of styles based on common methods for processing information. In this way, learning styles would be similar to personality styles—i.e., Myers-Briggs. But can learning styles be substantively defined in this way? If so, how might we tailor our teaching to accommodate such styles?

[Image Description: A pencil, apple, notebook, and microscope sit on a desk. Upon the notebook sits a small dog performing paw extensions. The background is endowed with the text: “Learning: Cool at Home or School!”]

Pictured: A Puppy Learning

These questions have preoccupied researchers throughout the past century. The concept of learning styles is related to that of “cognitive styles”, which emerged around 1950. Cognitive styles are situationally invariant methods of perception. Field dependence-independence is an example of a cognitive style. A person is said to exhibit field-independent traits if they are able to readily identify shapes against a cluttered background (Sternberg and Zhang 5). These styles are useful from a teaching perspective. When teaching with slides, it's not a good idea to put too much information on a single slide---some students will struggle more than others to isolate information within the clutter. Similarly, when teaching with whiteboards, we should erase information when it is no longer needed. It is also important to be aware of students’ sensory preferences. Visual learners will often prefer diagrams, charts, and drawings to illustrate concepts. Auditory learners will appreciate thoughtfully articulated lectures and notes.

Although potentially useful, cognitive styles are not specifically indicative of learning preferences. For a more thorough discussion of learning theory, we shall consult the work of Dr. David Kolb, now emeritus faculty at Case Western University in Cleveland, OH. Around 1980, Dr. Kolb published several papers conceptualizing what he calls Experiential Learning Theory (ELT). In his work, Dr. Kolb posits that effective learners require four general “nodes” of ability (Kolb 30):

• Concrete Experience: Learners must be able to involve themselves fully, without bias, in new experiences.
• Reflective Observation: Learners must be able to reflect on and observe their experiences from multiple perspectives.
• Abstract Conceptualization: Learners must be able to create concepts that integrate their observations into new theories
• Active Experimentation: Learners must be able to use these theories to make decisions and solve problems.

Kolb adapted this framework from the earlier works of Dewey, Lewin, and Piaget. The Lewinian Experiential Learning Model assumes that the nodes above are used recurrently, as stages in an ongoing learning cycle. Concrete experience induces reflective observation, which leads to abstract thought and encourages active experimentation. This leads to more concrete experiences, and the cycle repeats.

Teaching Tip: Try to adopt curricula that engage each stage of this learning cycle. When teaching new material, it is best to begin with concrete examples, rather than abstract concepts. Avoid instruction modes that focus on only one stage of the cycle.

[Image Description: Upon a blue background rest the words: “Empowered Teachers Empower Students”]

Pictured: Empowered Teachers Empower Students

The stages of the Lewinian Experiential Learning Model can be grouped into two dimensions. Concrete experience and abstract thought are two fundamentally different ways of understanding experience. Similarly, reflection and action are two different ways to transform this understanding to build new ideas. Dr. Kolb’s ELT suggests that each learner has different strengths in both dimensions. This results in four distinct learning styles, which were included in the original rendition of the Kolb Learning Style Inventory (KLSI). 

Detailed profiles for each learning style are provided in the KLSI Technical Specifications (Kolb and Kolb 9):

• Diverging: Persons with the diverging learning style are imaginative and well-suited to situations that call for generation of new ideas, such as brainstorming sessions, and they are often comfortable working in groups.
• Assimilating: Persons with the assimilating learning style are most comfortable working with ideas and concepts. They often prefer logical soundness to practical value in theories. They prefer lectures and analytical models, and they appreciate sufficient time to process information.
• Accommodating: Persons with the accommodating learning style have the ability to learn primarily from hands-on experiences. In educational settings, accommodating learners prefer working in groups, testing different approaches to solving problems, and communicating with others for information.
• Converging: Persons with the converging learning style excel at finding practical applications for theoretical concepts. In educational settings, converging learners enjoy labs, simulations, and applications.

Teaching Tip: Think about which of the learning styles above might be represented in your classes. Do you think some learning styles are represented more than others? Do you have students who do not fit nicely into the categories above? Try to develop lesson plans that engage students with a variety of preferences.

[Image Description: A blue arrow labeled “Information” sends rain-like projectiles into the blue silhouette of a human head]

Pictured: Information Processing

The original KLSI assumes that learners have a preference for both their mode of understanding information and their mode of transforming their understanding. This may be too simplistic--what if a learner is indifferent to one or both of these dimensions? To address these “borderline” cases, the KLSI was revised in 2011 to include nine learning styles, which are profiled in the KLSI Version 3 Technical Specifications (Kolb and Kolb 10). They are more precise, but the takeaway for educators is similar. In general, we should endeavor to balance the four stages of experiential learning in our instruction. The KLSI defines several roles to help educators teach around the experiential learning cycle. Dr. Kolb asserts that all four roles are important for fostering an effective learning environment (Kolb and Kolb 34):

• Coaching Role: Educators should help learners to apply their knowledge. We should work one-on-one with students to develop concepts---for example, by holding regular office hours, and we should provide fair and honest feedback. Targeted learning stages: Concrete Experience and Active Experimentation
• Facilitator Role: Educators should encourage learners to draw on personal experiences to understand concepts. We should facilitate group discussions and cultivate relationships with learners. Targeted learning stages: Concrete Experience and Reflective Observation
• Expert Role: Educators should present information clearly through lectures and text. We should demonstrate a thorough understanding of our craft and answer questions effectively. Targeted learning stages: Reflective Observation and Abstract Conceptualization
• Evaluator Role: Educators should effectively evaluate students’ performance. We should be clear about performance requirements and thoughtful when designing evaluations. Targeted learning stages: Abstract Conceptualization and Active Learning

Teaching Tip: Most of us already assume the roles above in some form. Think about the best way to balance these roles in your teaching, given the learning styles of your audience.

Here are two examples:

1. You’re teaching a mathematical theory course. Your class is filled with abstract ideas and logical proofs, so you believe many of your students prefer to learn through abstract conceptualization and reflective observation. As such, you should develop your “Expert” role. Understand your content thoroughly, and be sure new concepts are presented clearly.
2. You’re teaching an economics course. Because running hands-on experiments with economic theory is challenging, you believe many of your students prefer to learn through concrete experiences and reflective observation. In this case, you should develop your “Facilitator” role. Encourage group discussions, and use relatable examples in your lectures.

These are simplified examples. It is important to act in all the teaching roles above, and the content of a course does not necessarily dictate students’ preferred learning styles. This is why it is critical to build relationships with your students and ask for continual feedback when teaching.

The nature of learning has been studied extensively over the past 50 years, and it is a subject of ongoing research. The ELT advocated by Dr. Kolb and others is one of many ways we can view the learning process. Some may find ELT unrealistically rigid or inapplicable to their situation. Some have argued for a stronger distinction between “styles” and “abilities” when discussing learning preferences (Sternberg and Zhang 79). In the end, every student is unique, and we cannot hope to develop an exhaustive theory of learning. However, to quote George E.P. Box, “all models are wrong, but some are useful” (Box 792). As we move into a new year, I encourage you to consider some of the ideas we have discussed, and assess their utility yourself. Perhaps they will change your teaching outcomes for the better.

References

Box, George E.P. “Science and Statistics.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 71, no. 356, 1976, 791--799.

Kolb, Alice, and David Kolb. “Eight important things to know about The Experiential Learning Cycle.” Australian Educational Leader, vol. 40, no. 3, 2018, 8--14. Learning From Experience, https://learningfromexperience.com/downloads/research-library/eight-important-things-to-know-about-the-experiential-learning-cycle.pdf.

Kolb, Alice Y., and David A. Kolb. The Kolb Learning Style Inventory. 2013 Technical Specifications. 3.1 & 3.2, 15 May 2013. Learning From Experience, https://learningfromexperience.com/downloads/research-library/klsi-3_1-3_2-technical-specifications.pdf.

Kolb, David A. Experiential Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, Inc, 1984. Learning From Experience, https://learningfromexperience.com/downloads/research-library/the-process-of-experiential-learning.pdf.

Sternberg, Robert J., and Li-fang Zhang, editors. Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles. Taylor & Francis Group, 2001. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucr/detail.action?docID=425409.