concept (AC), and active experimentation (AE). After students totalled their scores, they plotted each score on the diagram, then connected the dots to get the kite shape. They were then informed that the shape and placement of the kite indicated which learning modes they tended toward. The entire process required 20 minutes. Figure 2 plots the scores of 52 students. There are clusters of points outside the 60% circle for active experimentation (9) and abstract conceptualization (10). These represent 36.5% of the scores and indicate these two as the predominant learning modes in the class. The individual scores (not designated in this figure) show that only one student was very low in both modes. With that exception, all students would be accommodated if teaching methods were used that addressed the two dominant modes. Figure 3 (modified from Svinicki & Dixon, 1987) lists sample activities that a teacher can assign or incorporate that support the different stages of the cycle of learning. Techniques for moving through the four stages during engineering class sessions can be found in the literature. For example, Harb, Durrant, and Terry (1993) found that accommmodator activities are typically lacking in engineering classrooms, especially in lower division courses. To accommodate the Kolb learning cycle, they offered samples from seven courses that typify an engineer’s education (eg., materials, chemical engineering, manufacturing) that accommodate each of the four learning style types: accommodators, convergers, assimilators, and divergers. Howard, Carver, and Lane (1996) presented a lesson plan for a structured programming course to accommodate the Kolb learning cycle and other models. When teachers become aware of students’ variations and consider the extent to which each of these preferences exists in their classroom, they can plan instruction accordingly. None of the learning-style types— accommodators, divergers, convergers, or assimilators—is inherently superior. Rather, to be optimally effective, instructors need to work through each of the four stages and use Concrete Experiences Small Group Discussion Specific Examples Trigger Videos Practical Exercises Simulations/Games Personal Stories Roll Playing Active Experimentation Reflective Observation Case Studies Creative Problem Solving Fieldwork Personal Journals Projects Discussion Groups Homework Brainstorming Laboratories Thought Questions Reflective Papers Observations Abstract Conceptualization Lectures Papers Analogies Model Building Theory Construction Questioning Figure 3. Instructional activities that support different aspects of the learning cycle (modified from Svinicki & Dixon, 1987, p. 142). T h e J o u rn a l o f T e c h n o lo g y S tu d ie s 26 activities appropriate for each stage to accommodate all learning styles in the class. They also need to consider what is appropriate for the course content and the learning styles that dominate their classes. Use of all four stages during a classroom session, while taking more time, will enhance students’ ability to learn independently and well. Culture and Learning Styles Guild (1994) examined the relationship between culture and learning style and concluded that the only way to meet the learning needs of culturally diverse students would be to intentionally apply diverse teaching strategies. In addressing the issue of structuring the basic public speaking course for African American students and other students of color, Nance and Foeman (1993) suggested including open discussion and physical movement as part of instruction to correspond to the unique learning styles of African American students. Belay (1992) and Correa and Tulbert (1991) described the learning styles that are typical of “field dependent” learners and that are attributed to certain cultures such as African Americans and Hispanics. With this style, learners tend to be more concerned with their social environment and prefer to work cooperatively with others. This type of learner may have serious adjustment problems in classes that emphasize lectures, competitiveness, and individualized work environments. Teachers who adopt methods that accommodate the variety of learning styles identified by Kolb will be addressing cultural differences in learning styles in the classroom simultaneously. Powell and Andersen (1994) presented a model for adapting instruction to the learner that connects a person’s culture to a particular learning style. In their essay on culture and classroom communication, they cited many examples of how students’ cultural diversity influences instructional communication in the United States. The student from an Eastern culture tends toward reflective observation— since knowledge and insight in Eastern cultures are believed to come from reflection and meditation. On the other hand, the Native American student may combine reflective observation and active experimentation since the Native American culture tends to utilize a visual learning style that is dependent on observation and imitation, rather than explicit verbalization. In his study of the Israeli culture (with respect to the equivalency of Kolb’s LSI), Katz (1988) stated that the Israeli culture is frequently characterized as aggressive, outspoken, energetic, and action oriented. The Israeli sample in his study displayed a more active experimentation orientation. Balanced Delivery System Kolb’s model offers a system for teachers who are attempting to reach all students in their classrooms. In fact, this model can be institutionally adopted and used in the total instructional program of primary, secondary, and/or postsecondary schools to assure that all students are tested and to accommodate them personally while they are at school. The learning cycle and activities associated with the different modes definitely provide students with maximal learning and significantly reduce students’ boredom and alienation. For example, teachers can lecture on the theory (abstract conceptualization); have students personally reflect on the content, ask questions, and discuss the content (reflective observation); assign homework, fieldwork, and laboratory projects (active experimentation); and direct small group discussions, give concrete examples, show videotapes, and discuss personal experiences (concrete experience). Through college curricular design, individual courses or sets of courses can take students through all four cycles. It may not always be possible to have a completely “balanced” lesson, course, or program. The characteristics of the course often detemine which particular teaching style works well with the preferred learning styles of students. For example, a laboratory course more closely aligns with the concrete learning style. A course of study can begin with assessment of students’ learning styles and follow with appropriate learning experiences to “fit the class.” Developing Learning Skills Whether or not a teacher completely subscribes to this model is not as important as becoming aware of the mix of student learning styles in a classroom and the need to “fit” instruction to student need. Presumably, the primary goal of teachers is to maximize student achievement. Selecting and combining various teaching styles, as opposed to staying with the style the teacher prefers, is an important step T h e J o u r n a l o f T e c h n o l o g y S t u d i e s 27 in meeting that goal. According to Sugarman (1985): 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 perspectives 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 on their experiences and experiments. In other words, learning to learn can become an additional course objective. (p. 267) The LSI can be used in a classroom setting to assess each student’s learning style. Associated with each of the four stages of the cycle of learning are activities the teacher can use to meet both the course objectives and the instructional needs of their students. Doing so will also mitigate the learning style differences that are culturally derived as well as address the varied learning styles of students in a technical or technology program. Dr. Ronald I. Sutliff is a Professor at Eastern Illinois University in the School of Technology . He is Member-at-large of Epsilon Pi Tau Virginia Baldwin is an Associate Professor Head, at the University of Lincoln Engineering Library, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.
[1]
J. Cornwell,et al.
Kolb'S Learning Style Theory Revisited
,
1994
.
[2]
Leonie Sugarman,et al.
Kolb's Model of Experiential Learning: Touchstone for Trainers, Students, Counselors, and Clients
,
1985
.
[3]
John N. Harb,et al.
Use of the Kolb Learning Cycle and the 4MAT System in Engineering Education
,
1993
.
[4]
R. Parker,et al.
Vocational and Academic Attributes of Students with Different Learning Styles.
,
1989
.
[5]
Getinet Belay.
Conceptual Strategies for Operationalizing Multicultural Curricula
,
1992
.
[6]
V. Correa,et al.
Teaching Culturally Diverse Students
,
1991
.
[7]
N. Dixon,et al.
The Kolb Model Modified for Classroom Activities
,
1987
.
[8]
Teresa A. Nance,et al.
Rethinking the basic public speaking course for African American students and other students of color.
,
1993
.
[9]
Curtis A. Carver,et al.
Felder's learning styles, Bloom's taxonomy, and the Kolb learning cycle: tying it all together in the CS2 course
,
1996,
SIGCSE '96.
[10]
P. Guild.
The Culture/Learning Style Connection.
,
1994
.
[11]
D. Kolb.
Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development
,
1983
.
[12]
J. Stice.
Using Kolb's Learning Cycle to Improve Student Learning.
,
1987
.
[13]
Noomi Katz,et al.
Individual Learning Style
,
1988
.
[14]
R. Felder,et al.
Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education.
,
1988
.