Kolb’s learning styles model was published in 1984 as part of his work on experiential learning. The styles are based on his learning cycle which moves from the concrete, to the reflective, the abstract, and the active, and can be entered at any stage. Kolb believed that for effective learning, all learners must progress through all stages of this cycle (Mcleod, 2023). This process converts experience into knowledge (Kurt, 2020).
Kolb based his four learning styles on the learning cycle above, and he believed that everyone has a preferred learning style, based on how we prefer to approach a task and how we think or feel about it (Mcleod, 2023).
I think we do have personal preferences or a tendency to approach learning in a particular way. However, I also think that it can vary depending on the learning context. I’ve previously done psychometric testing to build my profile and I know, based on the Thurstone Learning Styles, that my learning style is a mix of abstract conceptualization (creates ideas), active experimentation (decision making), which is grouped into convergence (practical application of ideas).
From an educator’s perspective, I don’t think we need to know the learning styles of each student in our class, as it would be overwhelming to tailor a lesson to every individual. However, it does make sense when planning and designing activities, to make sure that the different learning styles are represented. That way, students with different learning style preferences can engage with the lesson in the way that comes most naturally to them, which is consistent with Universal Design for Learning to create an inclusive classroom.
“.. there is little scientific evidence proving that learning styles exist and should guide the approach to instruction.”
Brown, 2022
Brown (2022), in her article “Debunking Learning Styles”, claims that there is research-based support for personal preferences on how information is presented, and that people have different aptitudes for types of thinking and processing information. Therefore, as educators, we can expect students to have individual preferences and aptitudes that will vary, but this in itself is not enough to support adjusting learning approaches on an individual basis.
From an edtech perspective, we should consider how different instructional techniques and technologies can be adapted for different learning preferences.
| Diverging (concrete experience/reflective observation) – hands-on experience, exploring new technologies, learning a new system and its pros and cons. | |||
| Assimilating (abstract conceptualisation/reflective observation) – independent self-paced work, designing projects, use of audio/video components in lesson. | |||
| Converging (abstract conceptualisation/active experimentation) – problem-solving, interactive activities, application of new tools to different contexts. | |||
| Accommodating (concrete experience/active experimentation) – independent discovery, active engagement, enquiry-based question and answer discussions. |
References
Brown, H. (2022, January 30). Debunking learning styles. Performance Matters. https://performancematters.ca/instructional-design/debunking-learning-styles/
Kurt, S. (2020, December 28). Kolb’s experiential learning theory and learning styles. Educational Technology. https://educationaltechnology.net/kolbs-experiential-learning-theory-learning-styles/
Mcleod, S. (2023, June 16). Kolb’s learning styles and experiential learning cycle. SimplyPsychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html