Learning Styles: The Kolb Inventory

Learning Styles and Strategies What is measured is PREFERENCE, not competence Better understanding of how you prefer to learn means a higher quotient for success Understanding your preference and that of others may help in communication, teamwork and future careers ©2003, First Year Engineering Program Faculty at Ohio State University

Factors that Influence LSI Personality type Education, specialization/experience Professional career choice Current job role (we become more skilled at what we do frequently) Current task or issue (context) Because of our hereditary equipment, our particular life experiences, and the demands of our present environment, we develop a preferred way of choosing. How might these five factors influence our learning styles?

Learning Objectives Describe your personal learning style. Identify strengths and weaknesses of your preferred learning style. Examine strengths and weaknesses of other learners' styles.

These four cycles are tied into learning Learning cycles 1. Concrete experience: where learning from feelings or reactions to experience influence your learning. 2. Reflective observation: where learning from watching and listening influence your learning. 3. Active conceptualization: where learning from thinking or analyzing problems in a systematic method influence your learning. 4. Active Experimentation: where learning by doing or results driven influence your learning. These four cycles are tied into learning Kolb theory, 1995

LSI: Two Main Dimensions How we Perceive or experience new information: Concrete - Abstract dimension How we Process or transform what we perceive: Active - Reflective dimension Concrete-Abstract Dimension In new situations some people prefer to sense and feel their way, while others prefer to think their way through. Those who sense and feel tend to rely on Concrete Experience-the tangible, felt qualities of the world. These people perceive through their senses, immersing themselves in concrete reality, and rely heavily on intuition, rather than stepping back and thinking through elements of the situation analytically. Others tend to grasp new information through symbolic representation or Abstract Conceptualization-thinking about, analyzing, or systematically planning, rather than using intuitions or sensation as a guide. One can think of this as a continuum, both modes are equally valuable, both have their strengths and weaknesses. Active-Reflective Dimension. In processing new information, some of us would rather jump right in and try our hand, while others would choose to carefully watch others who are involved in the experience and reflect on what happens. The doers favor Active Experimentation, the reflectors favor Reflective Observation. Again, we fall somewhere on the continuum, both modes have strengths and weaknesses. Each dimension presents us with a choice. Since it is virtually impossible, for example, to simultaneously drive a car (Concrete Experience) and analyze a driver’s manual about the car’s functioning (Abstract Conceptualization), we resolve the conflict by choosing.

What do my scores mean? Concrete Experience Reflective Observation Your scores indicate how much you rely on each of the 4 learning modes: Concrete Experience Reflective Observation Abstract Conceptualization Active Experimentation

Effective Learners Utilize all 4 Modes: Concrete Experience (CE): Involve themselves fully, openly, and without bias in new experiences

And… Reflective Observation (RO): Reflect on and observe these experiences from many perspectives.

And… Abstract Conceptualization (AC): Create concepts that integrate their observations into logically sound theories.

And… Active Experimentation (AC): Use these theories to make decisions and solve problems.

Where will you jump in? Kolb LSI Learning Cycle Diverging Converging Choose a model or goal Concrete Experience Compare it with reality Execute a solution Identify problems Accommodating Diverging Active Experimentation Reflective Observation Converging Assimilating Select a solution Select a problem Evaluate consequences of solutions Consider alternative solutions Abstract Conceptualization Where will you jump in?

DIVERGING “Facilitator/Motivator” Generates ideas Works well with people Shares ideas Very involved with learning Asks: “Why?” or “Why not?”

Diverging (Creating) Combines learning styles of CE and RO. Learners view concrete situations from many points of view. They perform better in “brainstorming” sessions, or situations that call for looking at things from many angles. Approach is to observe rather than take action Prefer to work in teams to gather information. Listen with an open mind and receive feedback.

ASSIMILATING “Theoretical/basic scientist” Theoretical interests Combine diverse ideas Create models Analytical/Inductive Asks: “What do I have here?”

Assimilating (Planning) Dominant styles are RO and AC. Use inductive reasoning and assimilating disparate observations into an integrated explanation. Theories need to be more logically sound and precise than of practical value. If theory doesn’t fit the “facts” they might disregard or reexamine the facts. Prefer lectures, reading, exploring analytical models. Need time to think things through. Interested in abstract thoughts more than people.

CONVERGING “Applied Scientist” Want concrete answers Prefer to work with things vs. people Like hands-on experiences Want answers quickly Asks: “How does this work?”

Converging (Deciding) Dominant learning abilities are AC and AE. Knowledge is organized through hypothetical- deductive reasoning, focus on a problem and converge on an answer. Best at finding practical uses for ideas and theories. Rather deal with technical tasks/problems than interpersonal issues. Prefer experimenting with ideas, simulations, lab assignments and practical applications.

ACCOMODATING “Practitioner” Take risks Focus on doing Adapt well to change Like new experiences Integrate application with experience Asks: ”What will this become?”

Accommodating (Acting) Dominant styles AE and CE. Interested in doing things, in carrying out plans, and involving themselves in new plans. Risk takers, excel often where one must adapt or accommodate. If the plan doesn’t fit the facts, often will disregard the facts. Rely heavily on others for information than on own technical analysis. Prefer to work with others to get assignments done, set goals and test different approaches. At ease with other people, but can be seen as impatient or pushy. They use intuition and trial and error, rather than their own analytical ability.