Kolb’s Model of Experiential Learning: Touchstone for Trainers, Students, Counselors, and Clients LEONIE SUGARMAN Kolb's movel of experiential learning and his typology of learning styles ‘re discussed. Their implications forthe counseling field are considered, K ‘kpatrick (1983) issued what was, I suspect, a plea from the heart of an experienced student for more meaningful struction. He offered a three-step model for more ef- fective presentations: (a) present the material, (b) personalize the material, and (c) allow the group to interact with the ma- terial. Many of us, however, operating from the teaching rather than the learning side of the fence (as Kirkpatrick also has done} have attempted to implement a strategy along these lines and have seen the session fall flat. Participants may not find the presentation appealing even if itis well-organized, uses visual aids, attempts to match the material to the needs of the students, and encourages group discussion (all of which Kirkpatrick rec- ‘ommends). They may fail to see the purpose either of the con- ceptual input or of the experiential exercises, or they may fail to see the links between the two. Kirkpatrick's strategy was based on the need to engage both the cognitive and the affective domains of the learner. Important as this may be, I propose that a more sophisticated concep: tualization of the learning and the teaching process is needed for both trainers and students. Kolb’s (1976, 1984) model of experiential learning, can also be viewed as a model of effective teaching. Kolb’s model and his concept of individual learning styles can form a useful basis for curriculum planning, imple mentation, and evaluation. Virtually all counselors now offer training through the provision of such services as career plan- ning workshops, skills training, and structured group experi- ences. Kolb’s model can provide a rationale for such activities, Moreover, it can be used by the students themselves to under- stand and enhance their learning and by counselors as a means of conceptualizing the counseling process. ‘THE EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING MODEL Kolb’s model integrates into a single framework two dimensions of cognitive growth and learning typically employed by cogni- tive psychologists: the concrete-abstract dimension and the ac- tive-reflective dimension. These dimensions, respectively, can be interpreted as referring to preferred types of involvement and preferred learning roles (Lewis & Margerison, 1979). The first dimension ranges from a preference for specific involve. ‘ment with tangible, relatively concrete issues to an involvement that is more detached and that requires an analytical approach ‘The second dimension has at one end the person who prefers an observational role and at the other end the person who enjoys. ‘more active participation. Typically, the manipulation of abstract 264 concepts is seen (e.g., in theories of cognitive development) as more advanced than and superior to the use of concrete oper- ations. Likewise, reflective, intemalized thoughts involving the contemplation of problems and the review of relevant infor- mation are seen (e.g., in models of rational decision makit superior fo more active, unplanned orientations to learning. Kolb avoids these hierarchical judgments and argues that each style of learning has its strengths and weaknesses and its ap- propriate place. By putting the abstract-concrete and the active-reflective di- ‘mensions in orthogonal relation to each other, Kolb uses the four polar positions to describe a four-stage, cyclical process of cffective learning (see Figure 1). At the core of Kolb’s model is 4 simple description of how experience is translated into con- cepts that can be used to guide the choice of new experiences. Kolb perceives immediate experience as the basis for the ob servation and reflection from which concepts are assimilated and then actively tested. This testing gives rise to a new ex- perience, and the whole cycle begins again. Effective or com- prehensive learning requires flexibility. Learners must shift from being actors to being observers and from being directly involved. to being analytically detached, o~ active Reflective Experimentation Observation \/ FIGURE 1 Kolb’s Model of Experiential Learning OURNAL OF COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT / DECEMBER 1985 / VOL. 64Kolb's Model of Experiential Learning INDIVIDUAL LEARNING STYLES Each stage of the cycle places different demands on learners. In the concrete experience (CE) stage, they must involve them- selves fully, openly, and without bias in new experiences. Then, during the reflective observation (RO) stage, they must take a step back and reflect on the experience. During the abstract conceptualization (AC) stage, they must understand these ob- servations and integrate them into logically sound theories. Fi- nally, in the active experimentation (AE) stage, they must test these theories and use them as bases for decision making and problem solving. Few people are equally effective at and com- fortable with all of these processes. People have preferred and habitual ways of learning. Kolb uses his model as the basis for a fourfold taxonomy of learning styles (see Figure 2). Divergers prefer concrete to abstract learning situations and re- flection to active involvement. Their greatest strengths lie in their imaginative abilities and their capacities to view conerete situations from a number of different stances. For example, divergers would enjoy analyzing videotapes of counseling interviews froma variety of theoretical perspectives. Assimilators prefer reflection and ab- stract situations. They excel in creating theoretical models and in assimilating disparate observations into integrated explanations. Assimilators are dissatisfied with programs that emphasize single perspectives (i.e., they will want to know what the alternatives are and why one perspective was chosen over another). They will not accept such things at face value. Convergers prefer to experiment actively with ideas and test the practical relevance of these ideas. Their interest is in the application of theories. Finally, accommodators, also called exe- ceutors (Carlsson, Keane, & Martin, 1976), prefer active involve- ment in concrete situations. Accommodators solve problems on the basis of trial and error and rely on other people for infor- mation. They are most comfortable with unstructured experien- tial learning but may criticize as intellectualization other people's attempts at understanding and analysis. Tosome extent, individuals are likely to see their own learning, styles as the best or the proper ways of doing things. Thus, accommodators may see assimilators as living in academic ivory towers, and assimilators may see accommodators as irrespon- sible pragmatists, Similarly, divergers may perceive convergers a close-minded and narrow, and convergers may perceive div- ‘ergers as indecisive, Expersence bivencer Aotive fective Experimentation bservation comenceR assiMiLaTon neatract FIGURE 2 Kolb’s Four Learning Style Preferences JOURNAL OF COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT / DECEMBER 1985 /VOL. 64 EVALUATION OF THE MODEL Kolb’s theory combines a theory of learning and a theory of learning styles, Therefore, there are atleast three necessary components to an evaluation of his work. Distinctions must be made among (a) establishing the existence of individual differences in learning styles, (b) measuring effectively these differences, if they are found to exist, and (¢) validating the cyclical model of learning, Kolb’s work has, in general, emerged favorably on the first and third of these counts, but his method. (of measuring learning styles has been criticized sharply. To test his theory, Kolb developed a simple self-description inventory, the Learning Styles Inventory (LSI; Kolb, Rubin, & Mcintyre, 1979), to measure individuals’ strengths and weaknesses as learners. The inventory is composed of nine sets of four words; respondents rank the words in each set according to how well each word characterizes their learnis styles. One word in each set describes each of the four di ferent learning abilities. For example, one set is feeling (CE), watching (RO), thinking (AC), and doing (AE). The inventory yields six scores: CE, RO, AC, AE, and two combination scores (AC minus CE; AE minus RO). The combination scores in- dicate an individual's preferred position on the abstract- concrete dimension and on the reflective-active dimension, respectively. Norms were developed from a sample of nearly 2,000 adults with varying educational and occupational back- ‘grounds (Kolb et al, 1978), The inventory’s technical manual (Kolb, 1976) provides data for a range of educational and occupational groups and gives the results of relevant psychometric analyses. For example, the LSI has differentiated between the learning styles of managers ‘and management students who have different undergraduate ‘majors (Kolb, 1976), managers following different career paths ina single company (Kolb, 1976), and medical students hoping to enter different medical specialties (Plovnik, 1975) Although the LSI has demonstrated successfully individual differences in preferred learning styles, it has a number of weak- nesses. Its a forced-choice questionnaire (Honey & Mumford, 1982), and its ranking and scoring methods result in the four dimensions (CE, RO, AC, and AE) being dependent on one another (Freedman & Stumpf, 1978). Because the LSI is an ip- sative measure, a high score on one dimension necessitates low- er scores on others. Furthermore, as James (1980) suggested, people who do not normally think about the process of learning will receive little benefit from ranking items according to how well they characterize learning styles. James (1980) also ques- tioned the classifications of some items. He argued, by way of example, that coaluatice could be thought to describe reflective ‘observation instead of, or in addition to, abstract conceptual zation. Test-retest reliability data (Freedman & Stumpf, 1978; Kolb, 1976) suggest that an individual's scores may be rather volatile, which makes the results of doubtful value for exper- intial learning Research has generally confirmed the validity of Kolb’s cyclical ‘model ofthe learning process (Carlsson etal, 1976). Moderately strong, negative correlations between the opposite poles ofthe abstract-concrete and the active-reflective dimensions have been found (Freedman & Stumpf, 1979; Jervis, 1983). In a factor anal- ysis of the LSI (Freedman & Stumpf, 1978), items loaded on two bipolar factors, although the loadings were fairly low. A his- togram presentation of LSI scores Gervis, 1983) showed that the Aistribution of scores on each scale may be bimodal. Freedman ‘and Stumpf (1978), perhaps the sharpest critics ofthe LSI, seemed to sum up the position accurately. They concluded that Kolb’s model of learning as a four-stage, problem-solving process mer- ited consideration, irrespective of the merits of the LSI as a measurement device. 265Sugarman ALTERNATIVE MEASURES OF LEARNING STYLES If Kolb’s model of learning, is more valid than is his LSI, the question of how else to measure individual learning styles be- comes important. Lewis and Margerison (1979) wrote of the relevance of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI; Myers, 1975) in measuring learning styles. As does the Learning Styles Inventory, the MBTI examines preferred ways in which ind- viduals interact with the environment. It focuses specifically on the ways people take in information (the sensing-intuition di- mension) and on the ways they reach conclusions concerning that information (the thinking-feeling dimension). It also pro- vides a measure of people's preferences for acquiring or usin information (the percelving-judging dimension) and an indi cation of whether people prefer to direct these processes out- ward onto the world of people and things or inward onto the world of ideas (the extravert-introvert dimension). Jung’s (1971) theory of psychological types underpins both the LSI and the MBTI. Lewis and Margerison (1978) found cor- relations between several dimensions of the two iaventories (see Figure 3). Kolb (1976) predicted that individuals scoring high on concrete experience would use sensation asa mode of perceiving and feeling as a mode of judging, Abstract conceptualizers were ‘expected t0 use intuition as a perceiving mode and thinking as a judging mode. Active experimenters should be extroverts who use sensing; reflective observers should be introverts who use intuition. Both Kolb’ (1976) and Lewis and Margerison’s (1979) findings tended to support these hypotheses. Insituations in which learning styles are of particular concer, the MBTI may be unnecessarily long and sophisticated. Its com. plexity may cloud the issue and cause confusion rather than larity. When used for other purposes, however, the MBTY's learning style implications may warrant consideration. ‘As an alternative to the LSI, Honey and Mumford (1982) de- veloped the Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ). Accepting Kolb’s notion of a circular learning process but questioning the 2 Feeding senfition rerenrtion ype of Involvaent fesusgenent Conceptual ization 2 Intuition 1 a 2 heesye neriective ciperinentation observation FIGURE 3 ian Types and Learning Styles (Lewis & Margerison, 1979) Jun validity and appropriateness of the LSI, Honey and Mumford developed their questionnaire and their views about different learning styles around recognizable statements of learning be- havior. ‘The Learning Styles Questionnaire is composed of 80 items that respondents mark with either a checkmark or a cross to indicate general agreement or general disagreement, respec- tively. To enhance credibility and face validity and to make respondents’ tasks more meaningful, the authors made most items behavioral ones. This method contrasts with the single- word items of Kolb's LSI Although the LSQ was designed for managerial populations, itsitems are sufficiently nonspecific forit to be applicable to general populations. Because of the importance that Honey and Mumford attached to observable behavior, their descriptions of leaming styles ‘were more concrete than were Kolb’s. They identified four differ- ent learning styles that are broadly equivalent to the four stages of Kolb’s leaming cycle. Activists thrive on the challenge of new experiences and are bored with consolidation and repetition. Re- flectors collect data, ponder experiences, and observe these data and experiences from many perspectives. Theorists adapt and in- tegrate observations into complex, logically sound theories. Prag- ‘matists experiment with applications and test ideas, theories, and techniques to see if they apply in practice. Honey and Mumford (1982) found a relatively low correlation (0.23) between activist scores on the LSQ and concrete experi- ence scores on the ISI. Correlations between the other parallel scores are somewhat higher: 0.54 (theorist, abstract concep- tualization), 0.68 (pragmatist, active experimentation), and 0.73 (reflector, reflective observation). Because these results are based on a sample of 29 people, however, they must be viewed with caution. Norms for the LSQ are based on a sample of 1,302 people employed in a range of managerial and professional po- sitions in the United Kingdom. The LSQ is in the process of being evaluated psychometrically, but to date these evaluations have generally involved very small samples. Thus, test-retest reliability was 0.89 for the inventory and ranged from 0.81 (ac- tivist to 0.95 (theorist) for the different scales. The time between, completions was 2 weeks, but the sample size was only 50, Itdoes not seem that a factor analysis has been performed on the LSQ; however, intercorrelations between the different scores indicate that the most common similar score pairings, in de- scending order of likelihood, are reflector-theorist, theorist- pragmatist reflector pragmatist, and activist pragmatist. The other two combinations (activist-eflector and activist-theorist) were less likely to occur because, in both cases, there was virtually nocorrelation between them. These results suggest that the LSQ does not reflect two underlying and orthogonal dimensions in the way that Kolb’s model does, ‘One must presume that the amount and quality of evaluative data on the LSQ will increase, Meanwhile, it should be noted that Honey and Mumford intended answers secured from the {questionnaire to be used as starting points, not finishing points. They made this clear in their discussion in the LSQ manual of the inventory’s potential for providing practical guidelines both to people who are trying to develop their learning skills and to people who are trying to help them. The authors also developed 4 separate booklet designed specifically for LSQ respondents (Honey & Mumford, 1983) VARIANTS OF KOLB'S MODEL Kolb’s model has stimulated numerous variants. Honey and. Mumford (1983) described learning, from experience as a four- stage process that involves (a) having an experience, (b) reviewing the experience, (c) concluding from the experience, and (@) planning the next steps. This description is basically a re phrasing of Kolb's stages in language more acceptable to a gen- JOURNAL OF COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT / DECEMBER 1985/ VOL. 64Kolb’s Model of Experiential Learning ‘ral (managerial) population. Although Honey and Mumford believed that all learning styles are needed and that each style is suited to particular situations, they did not emphasize this sequential nature of effective learning in the way that Kolb dc. “Morris (1980) deemphasized the emotional component of learning and relabeled Kolb’s stages to make them more concrete and applicable to management problem solving, Beginning with active experimentation, Morris reinterpreted Kolb’s stages as project planning, active achievement, reviewing progress and Setbacks, and interpreting activities. Boot and Boxer (1980) ar- sued that the major aspect of learning is not change in overt behavior but the process of discovering new meanings in ex- periences. Thus, their version ofthe learning cycle, which they refer to as reflective learning, includes personal experience, pet- sonal reflection, personal meaning, and personal action. Using Kolb's model esa starting point, James (1980) invoked the concept of peoples’ needs to gain realistic confidence in their abilities as a mediating variable between experience and learn- ing. In other words, James used the model to address the ques- tion of what influences learning effectiveness. IMPLICATIONS Kirkpatrick's (1983) article, which prompted my article, was di- rected at trainers, and it was the significance of Kolb’s ideas for this group that seemed most in need of elucidation. Because the scope of Kolb's work is wide, however, its relevance to other members of the counseling field should also be considered. The model's high level of abstraction, which others (e.g., Honey & Mumford, 1982; Morris, 1980) have sought to avoid, is, in this instance, one ofits strengths. The model's abstract quality allows it to be used flexibly and allows the specific manifestations of ‘each stage to be a reflection of the goals of the user. ‘Thus, Kolb's model can also be used to represent the coun- seling process, because what is counseling if not a process of learning and exploration? The analogy could proceed as follows: ‘Asa counselor | aspire to approach each cient in ano fined way ad atiempt to involve myself fully and without bias in the experience ln other words, 1 begin by attempting to Achieve the objectives of Kolbe concrete experience stage. | ‘must, however, main separate from the experience so that | an cbserve and reflect on i thereby fulling the iremonts ofthe next stage inte leaening cle. On the tals ofthese observations, Pdevelop athety or hypathesis of how best to intervene next. This hypothesis ight, of couse, be that i is best to make no immediate intervention. Finaly {est out my hypothesis by intervening a by not intervening Aoi experendt and rece on fre cobeequencs fie intervention the leening cle begins to repeat sl ‘Counselors can also use Kolb’s model to reflect on their coun- seling styles. Thus, divergers, who prefer learning through con- crete experience and reflective observation, may ask themselves whether they are sometimes too reluctant to impose their own, views on the counseling relationship. Convergers, because of their emphasis on abstract conceptualization and active exper- imentation, may need to decide whether they tend to be too dominant. Trainers as well as students have preferred learning styles and should consider the extent to which these preferences are reflected in their course designs. A key factor in Kolb’'s model of learning is that neither pole of the concrete-abstract dimension fr of the active-reflective dimension is inherently superior. Rath- er, each is necessary if maximum learning is to be gained. Ideal- ly, training programs should reflect this. ‘Kolb’s madel offers a coherent framework for trainers who are attempting to develop balanced programs and suggests a logical ordering of the different inputs and exercises. Also, the ‘model can be used for planning both an individual session and JOURNAL OF COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT / DECEMBER 1985 /VOL. 64 ‘total program. In a total program, which may include extended abstract conceptualization phases (e.g., lecture courses) and ex- tended concrete experience phases (¢.g., student placements), secondary learning cycles may be built into the overall patterns These cycles provide students maximum learning and prevent boredom and alienation. For example, trainers can explain to students on placement why they are being asked to reflect (RO) and theorize (AC) on their experiences and to solve problems fon the basis of their hypotheses (AE), ‘As an alternative to developing balanced programs, trainers can attempt to ensure compatibility between the nature of the learning experience and the preferred learning styles of the stu- dents. Thus, if a program is strongly biased toward concrete experience or theoretical abstraction, then these data can be used. in marketing the course so that individuals with incompatible learning styles are not tempted to attend. Alternatively, pro- grams can begin with a consideration and assessment of par~ ticipants’ preferred learning styles and continue accordingly with, subsequent learning experiences. According to Kolb (Kolb, 1984; Kolb et al., 1979), the most effective learning is that which emanates from personal expe riences—hence his identification of concrete experience as the first stage in the learning cycle. Programs that begin with an experiential exercise are consistent with this philosophy. A stu- dent, however, enters a learning situation with expectations about the form that the program will take; a policy of beginning, with a concrete experience may contradict these expectations, ‘Therefore, a program that begins at the abstract conceptuali- zation stage, which is what students are more likely to expect, may be more appropriate. Such a strategy is consistent with Kirkpatrick's (1983) recommendation that presenting the ma- terial should be the first stage in the process of making presen- tations, The capacity of Kolb's framework for helping people expand their repertoires of learning skills is also important. Students who are taught Kolb’s ideas, both as the rationale for course design and as a model of the learning process, can conceptualize the total learning process, empathize more readily with the per- spectives of students with different learning styles, and improve their own methods of learning. Although people may always prefer to learn through particular processes, they can develop their capacities in other fields. Thus, divergers can learn to give conscious attention to the applications of their observations and can realize the validity of doing so. Accommodators can reflect oon their experiences and experiments. In other words, learning to lear can become an additional course objective (Sugarman, Georgiades, & Wilkinson, 1979). ‘The ideas of Kirkpatrick and Kolb are largely compatible. Kirk- ppatrick’s model incorporates an implicit model of learning that is broadly similar to Kolb’s. As already indicated, Kirkpatrick's stage of presenting the materia is primarily a period of abstract conceptualization. His idea of personalizing material and match- ing it to the needs of the group corresponds with Kolb’s asking participants to experiment actively with material to generate personally relevant, concrete experiences. Much of Kirkpatrick's third stage, enabling group interaction, continues the emphasis ‘on concrete experience, but some of his suggestions (e.g., “buzz groups” and homework assignments) are likely to lead to the Process of reflective observation. Undoubtedly, such a model is implicit in many programs in the counseling field. Much can be gained, however, from mak- ing it explicit. Explaining to participants the links between course components and the Kolb model clarifies the objectives of the program, helps them to understand why the course takes the form it does, and makes it easier to relate theory and practice toeach other. Also, such an explanation allows course designers to identify any missing or overemphasized components in the 267