- Starred
When you star items, they’ll show up here for easy access. Learn more
- Recent
When you star items, they’ll show up here for easy access. Learn more
Learning Styles and Learning
Spaces: Enhancing Experiential
Learning in Higher Education
ALICE Y. KOLB
Experience-Based Learning Systems
DAVID A. KOLB
Case Western Reserve University
Drawing on the foundational theories of John Dewey and Kurt Lewin, we examine recent
developments in theory and research on experiential learning and explore how this work
can enhance experiential learning in higher education. We introduce the concept of
learning space as a framework for understanding the interface between student learning
styles and the institutional learning environment. We illustrate the use of the learning
space framework in three case studies of longitudinal institutional development. Finally,
we present principles for the enhancement of experiential learning in higher education
and suggest how experiential learning can be applied throughout the educational
environment by institutional development programs, including longitudinal outcome
assessment, curriculum development, student development, and faculty development.
...............................................................................................................................
.........................................
“(There is a) need of forming a theory of ex-
perience in order that education may be in-
telligently conducted upon the basis of
experience.”—John Dewey
“There is nothing so practical as a good theory.”
—Kurt Lewin
Recent efforts to improve higher education, includ-
ing reports from the National Research Council
(Bransford, Brown, & Cocking 2000), the American
Psychological Association (1997), and a number of
other scholars (Baxter-Magolda, 1999; Boyatzis, Co-
wen, & Kolb 1995; Keeton, Sheckley, & Griggs 2002;
King, 2003; Light, 2001; Mentkowski and Associates,
2000; Zull 2002) have focused on improving the
learning process in education through the applica-
tion of research from what has been called “the
new science of learning” (Branford, Brown, & Cock-
ing, 2000). One stream of this research is focused
on the concept of experiential learning. Experien-
tial learning is often misunderstood as a set of
tools and techniques to provide learners with ex-
periences from which they can learn. Others have
used the term to describe learning that is a mind-
less recording of experience. Yet experiential
learning is above all a philosophy of education
based on what Dewey (1938) called a “theory of
experience.” He argued that while traditional ed-
ucation had little need for theory since practice
was determined by tradition, the new experiential
approach to education needed a sound theory of
experience to guide its conduct. In this essay we
examine the theory of experiential learning (Kolb,
1984) and related research to explore how this
knowledge can be used to enhance learning in
higher education.
We begin with a brief summary of experiential
learning theory (ELT) and an overview of current
research based on the theory. This is followed by
the introduction of two new developments in ELT, a
refinement in the assessment of experiential learn-
ing styles using the Learning Style Inventory (LSI)
and the introduction of the concept of learning
space as a framework for understanding the inter-
face between student learning styles and the edu-
cational learning environment based on Lewin’s
concept of life space. Use of the learning space
framework is illustrated in case studies of longitu-
We thank James Bailey, Sandy Bell, Richard Boyatzis, David
Justice, D. Christopher Kayes, Tony Lingham, Charalampos
Mainemelis, Verena Murphy, Ronald Sims, Barry Sheckley, Yo-
shi Yamazaki, and James Zull for their helpful feedback on this
manuscript.
Academy of Management Learning & Education
, 2005, Vol. 4, No. 2, 193–212.
...............................................................................................................................
.........................................
193
dinal institutional development in three diverse
programs in higher education, the Cleveland Insti-
tute of Art, the Case Western Reserve University
undergraduate program, and the Case Weather-
head School of Management MBA program. Fi-
nally, we present principles for the enhancement
of experiential learning in higher education and
suggest how experiential learning can be applied
throughout the educational environment by insti-
tutional development programs that include longi-
tudinal outcome assessment, curriculum devel-
opment, student development, and faculty
development.
EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING THEORY
Experiential learning theory draws on the work of
prominent 20th century scholars who gave experi-
ence a central role in their theories of human
learning and development—notably John Dewey,
Kurt Lewin, Jean Piaget, William James, Carl Jung,
Paulo Freire, Carl Rogers and others—to develop a
holistic model of the experiential learning process
and a multilinear model of adult development
(Kolb, 1984). The theory is built on six propositions
that are shared by these scholars.
1. Learning is best conceived as a process, not in
terms of outcomes. To improve learning in higher
education, the primary focus should be on engag-
ing students in a process that best enhances their
learning—a process that includes feedback on the
effectiveness of their learning efforts. As Dewey
notes, “[E]ducation must be conceived as a con-
tinuing reconstruction of experience: . . . the pro-
cess and goal of education are one and the same
thing” (Dewey 1897: 79).
2. All learning is
re
learning. Learning is best
facilitated by a process that draws out the stu-
dents’ beliefs and ideas about a topic so that they
can be examined, tested, and integrated with new,
more refined ideas.
3. Learning requires the resolution of conflicts
between dialectically opposed modes of adapta-
tion to the world. Conflict, differences, and dis-
agreement are what drive the learning process. In
the process of learning one is called upon to move
back and forth between opposing modes of reflec-
tion and action and feeling and thinking.
4. Learning is a holistic process of adaptation to
the world. Not just the result of cognition, learning
involves the integrated functioning of the total per-
son— thinking, feeling, perceiving, and behaving.
5. Learning results from synergetic transactions
between the person and the environment. In Pi-
aget’s terms, learning occurs through equilibration
of the dialectic processes of assimilating new ex-
periences into existing concepts and accommodat-
ing existing concepts to new experience.
6. Learning is the process of creating knowledge.
ELT proposes a constructivist theory of learning
whereby social knowledge is created and re-
created in the personal knowledge of the learner.
This stands in contrast to the “transmission” model
on which much current educational practice is
based, where preexisting fixed ideas are transmit-
ted to the learner.
ELT defines learning as “the process whereby
knowledge is created through the transformation
of experience. Knowledge results from the combi-
nation of grasping and transforming experience”
(Kolb, 1984: 41). The ELT model portrays two dialec-
tically related modes of grasping experience—
Concrete Experience (CE) and Abstract Conceptu-
alization (AC)—and two dialectically related
modes of transforming experience—Reflective Ob-
servation (RO) and Active Experimentation (AE).
Experiential learning is a process of constructing
knowledge that involves a creative tension among
the four learning modes that is responsive to con-
textual demands. This process is portrayed as an
idealized learning cycle or spiral where the
learner “touches all the bases”— experiencing, re-
flecting, thinking, and acting—in a recursive pro-
cess that is responsive to the learning situation
and what is being learned. Immediate or
concrete
experiences
are the basis for observations and
re-
flections.
These reflections are assimilated and
distilled into
abstract concepts
from which new
implications for action can be drawn. These impli-
cations can be
actively tested
and serve as guides
in creating new experiences. In
The Art of Chang-
ing the Brain: Enriching Teaching by Exploring the
Biology of Learning,
James Zull, a biologist and
founding director of CWRU’s University Center for
Innovation in Teaching and Education (UCITE),
sees a link between ELT and neuroscience re-
search, suggesting that this process of experiential
learning is related to the process of brain function-
ing (as shown in Fig. 1).
Put into words, the figure illustrates that con-
crete experiences come through the sensory
cortex, reflective observation involves the in-
tegrative cortex at the back, creating new ab-
stract concepts occurs in the frontal integra-
tive cortex, and active testing involves the
motor brain. In other words, the learning cycle
arises from the structure of the brain (Zull
2002: 18 –19).
The concept of learning style describes individ-
ual differences in learning based on the learner’s
194
Academy of Management Learning & Education
June
preference for employing different phases of the
learning cycle. Because of our hereditary equip-
ment, our particular life experiences, and the de-
mands of our present environment, we develop a
preferred way of choosing among the four learning
modes. We resolve the conflict between being con-
crete or abstract and between being active or re-
flective in patterned, characteristic ways.
ELT as defined by Kolb posits that learning is the
major determinant of human development, and
how individuals learn shapes the course of their
personal development. His previous research has
shown that learning styles are influenced by per-
sonality type, educational specialization, career
choice, and current job role and tasks (Kolb, 1984).
Yamazaki (2002, 2003) has recently identified cul-
tural influences as well. The ELT developmental
model (Kolb, 1984) defines three stages: (1)
acqui-
sition,
from birth to adolescence, where basic abil-
ities and cognitive structures develop; (2)
special-
ization,
from formal schooling through the early
work and personal experiences of adulthood,
where social, educational, and organizational
socialization forces shape the development of a
particular, specialized learning style; and (3)
inte-
gration
in midcareer and later life, where non-
dominant modes of learning are expressed in work
and personal life. Development through these
stages is characterized by increasing complexity
and relativism in adapting to the world and by
increased integration of the dialectic conflicts be-
tween AC and CE and AE and RO. Development is
conceived as multilinear, based on an individual’s
particular learning style and life path—develop-
ment of CE increases affective complexity, of RO
increases perceptual complexity, of AC increases
symbolic complexity, and of AE increases behav-
ioral complexity.
RESEARCH ON EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING
THEORY
ELT was developed following Lewin’s plan for the
creation of scientific knowledge by conceptualiz-
ing phenomena through formal, explicit, testable
theory. In Lewin’s approach, “before a system can
be fully useful the concepts in it have to be defined
in a way that (1) permits the treatment of both the
qualitative and quantitative aspects of phenom-
ena in a single system, (2) adequately represents
the conditional-genetic (or causal) attributes of
phenomena, (3) facilitates the measurement (or op-
erational definition) of these attributes, and (4) al-
lows both generalization to universal laws and
concrete treatment of the individual case” (Cart-
wright, 1951: ix). A theory developed by this pro-
cess can be a powerful instrument for stimulating
and focusing scholarly research conversation.
Since its first statement in 1971 (Kolb, 1971; Kolb,
Rubin, & McIntyre, 1971), there have been many
studies using ELT to advance the theory and prac-
tice of experiential learning. The July 2005 update
of the
Experiential Learning Theory Bibliography
(Kolb & Kolb, 2005) includes 1876 entries. Because
ELT is a holistic theory of learning that identifies
learning style differences among different aca-
FIGURE 1
The Experiential Learning Cycle and Regions of the Cerebral Cortex.
Note.
Reprinted with permission
from (Zull 2002).
2005
Kolb and Kolb
195
demic specialties, it is not surprising to see that
ELT research is highly interdisciplinary, address-
ing learning and educational issues in many
fields. An analysis of the 1004 entries in the 1999
bibliography (Kolb, Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2001)
shows 207 studies in management, 430 in educa-
tion, 104 in information science, 101 in psychology,
72 in medicine, 63 in nursing, 22 in accounting and
5 in law. About 55% of this research has appeared
in refereed journal articles, 20% in doctoral disser-
tations, 10% in books and book chapters, and 15%
in conference proceedings, research reports, and
other venues.
There have been two comprehensive reviews of
the ELT literature, one qualitative and one quanti-
tative. In 1991 Hickcox extensively reviewed the
theoretical origins of ELT and qualitatively ana-
lyzed 81 studies that focused on the application of
the ELT model as well as on the application of the
concept of learning style in accounting and busi-
ness education, helping professions, medical pro-
fessions, postsecondary education and teacher ed-
ucation. She concluded that overall 61.7% of the
studies supported ELT, 16.1% showed mixed sup-
port, and 22.2% did not support ELT. In 1994 Iliff
conducted a meta-analysis of 101 quantitative LSI
studies culled from 275 dissertations and 624 arti-
cles that were qualitative, theoretical, and quanti-
tative studies of ELT and the Kolb Learning Style
Inventory (LSI; Kolb 1971, 1985, 1999a; see also
Hickox, 1991). Iliff found that 49 studies showed
strong support for the LSI, 40 showed mixed sup-
port, and 12 studies showed no support. About half
of the 101 studies reported sufficient data on the
LSI scales to compute effect sizes by way of meta-
analysis. Most studies reported correlations that
fell in the .2 to .5 range for the LSI scales. In con-
clusion Iliff suggested that the magnitude of these
statistics is not sufficient to meet standards of pre-
dictive validity, while noting that the LSI was not
intended to be a predictive psychological test like
IQ, GRE, or GMAT. The LSI was originally devel-
oped as a self-assessment exercise and a means
for construct validation of ELT. Judged by the stan-
dards of construct validity, ELT has been widely
accepted as a useful framework for learning cen-
tered educational innovation, including instruc-
tional design, curriculum development, and life-
long learning. Academic field and job
classification studies viewed as a whole also show
a pattern of results consistent with the ELT struc-
ture of knowledge theory.
Most of the debate and critique in the ELT/LSI
literature has centered on the psychometric prop-
erties of the LSI. Results from this research have
been of great value in revising the LSI in 1985 and
again in 1999. Recent critique has been more fo-
cused on the theory than the instrument examining
the intellectual origins and underlying assump-
tions of ELT from what might be called a critical
theory perspective, where the theory is seen as
individualistic, cognitivist, and technological (e.g.,
Vince, 1998; Holman, Pavlica, & Thorpe, 1997; Hop-
kins, 1993). Kayes (2002) has reviewed these and
other critics of ELT and offered his own critique of
the critics. He suggests that critics have over-
looked the role of Vygotsky’s social-constructivist
learning theory in the ELT theory of development
and the role of personal knowledge and social
knowledge in experiential learning. He proposes
an extension of ELT based on Lacan’s poststructur-
alist analysis that elaborates the fracture between
personal and social knowledge and the role that
language plays in shaping experience.
LEARNING STYLE ASSESSMENT
Much of the research on ELT has focused on the
concept of learning style using the Learning Style
Inventory (LSI) to assess individual learning styles
(Kolb 1971, 1999a,b; see also Hickox, 1991). Although
individuals tested on the LSI show many different
patterns of scores, previous research with the in-
strument has identified four learning styles that
are associated with different approaches to learn-
ing: diverging, assimilating, converging, and ac-
commodating. The following summary of the four
basic learning styles is based on both research
and clinical observation of these patterns of LSI
scores (Kolb, 1984, 1999a).
An individual with diverging style has CE and
RO as dominant learning abilities. People with
this learning style are best at viewing concrete
situations from many different points of view. The
style is labeled “diverging” because a person with
it performs better in situations that call for gener-
ation of ideas, such as a “brainstorming” session.
People with a diverging learning style have broad
cultural interests and like to gather information.
They are interested in people, tend to be imagina-
tive and emotional, have broad cultural interests,
and tend to specialize in the arts. In formal learn-
ing situations, people with the diverging style pre-
fer to work in groups, to listen with an open mind,
and to receive personalized feedback.
An individual with an assimilating style has AC
and RO as dominant learning abilities. People
with this learning style are best at understanding
a wide range of information and putting it into
concise, logical form. Individuals with an assimi-
lating style are less focused on people and more
interested in ideas and abstract concepts. Gener-
196
Academy of Management Learning & Education
June