Learning Styles

While the notion that people learn differently is hardly new, it has been David A. Kolb, Professor of Organisational Behaviour at the Weatherhead School of Management, who has encapsulated the idea in recent years. Based on the much earlier work of Kurt Lewin, Kolb put forward a cycle of learning, initially on his own and then working with Roger Fry.

The entry to the cycle can be at any point and the theory is that each person goes around the cycle. Thus, some people start with concrete experience, and then move on to observation and reflection, thence to forming abstract concepts and finally to testing in new situations. However, others might start with an abstract concept (a theory), then test it in new situations. Concrete experience (the theory in use) can then be followed by observation and reflection which may in turn lead to a modification of the theory - and the cycle starts again.

Kolb and Fry took personality implications from the learning cycle. Thus, people who are most comfortable starting the cycle at different places may be different from each other in personality terms. Their division into four types of learner - converger, accommodator, diverger and assimilator - was later re-developed by Honey and Mumford who referred to the four types as Pragmatist, Activist, Reflector and Theorist.

The Honey/Mumford four "types" of learner may be briefly characterised as follows.

• Pragmatists test ideas to see if they work, are down to earth, problem solvers.
• Activists try anything once, are easily bored, seek new experiences and are willing to have a go.
• Reflectors like to ponder, to observe from different perspectives, do not draw quick conclusions but listen and observe.
• Theorists seek to analyse and synthesise, looking for the rational schema. They like models and seek to resolve ambiguity.

(You can get an idea of your own preferred learning style through our Learning Advisor.)

Convergent and divergent thinking

It is of interest to note that Kolb's word for Mumford's "pragmatist" learning style is "converger" and his word for "reflector" is "diverger." The psychologist Liam Hudson, in his book, Frames of Mind, made a key distinction between convergent thinkers and divergent thinkers. Convergent thinkers are those who assume that there is a "correct" answer and seek to converge upon it. They start from many alternatives seeking the one answer.

Divergent thinkers assume that there are many answers and that creating them is the objective. Thus, they may start from one answer or assumption and seek to diverge out to other possibilities.

Hudson analysed the subject choices of students at school. He found that 75% of divergent thinkers chose arts subjects while 75% of convergent thinkers chose mathematics or science subjects.

Management is neither an arts subject nor indeed a science. It has scientific principles and research but many writers have referred to management as an art rather than a science if only because of the huge variety of situations and possibilities that the manager faces.

Learning styles and e-learning

The essential point here is that people learn in very different ways and at different speeds with different learning strategies. The human trainer can often cope with such differences but traditional programmed learning - and it has to be said, the vast majority of e-learning - copes with only one or two of the learning strategies and preferences.

Most e-learning programmes pose a question or a problem and then offer a choice between alternative answers, one of which is assumed to be right. Thus, most e-learning programmes by their very nature, suit convergent thinkers more than they do divergent thinkers.  It is for this reason that e-learning may be said to "work very well, for those it works well for." In many ways, e-learning is like time-management diaries or KT decision making. They each work brilliantly for a sub-set of the management population - and not at all for others. This problem has been at the root of many failed e-learning implementations.

This site and learning styles

The learning technology and content of this site is designed to appeal to all learning styles by offering different learning strategies and different routes through the material. We place the fact that people learn differently - and are differently motivated to learn - at the centre of what we do. We are not about what people think of as e-learning.

Think of the site as a body of knowledge, a motivation to explore management, an advice and help centre, a monthly magazine, an intelligent dictionary, a set of challenging thoughts and ideas, a set of guided and unguided learning opportunities, a reward system, a club and a world-wide community for learning about management.

Here are some examples

Convergent thinkers will benefit from the knowledge exercises, primarily about basic management skills, which are in true/false format. Those moving on through the learning cycle from pragmatist to activist will find that even these knowledge exercises are treated not as the final word but as the starting point for thinking about management. The skills which are the subject matter of the exercises are debated further in the related articles. Convergers will respond to the pathways, a series of guided routes through the material on the site.

Divergent thinkers will benefit from the self-discovery exercises which offer them the opportunity of thinking creatively about the options in management, using their own results to learn the alternatives in management behaviour. Divergers will use the teasing links on the site, exploring and creating their own routes.

Pragmatists will use the glossary to evaluate management terms and will use the case studies to test their learning and apply it to real life. They will also benefit from the ability to pose real-time questions to The Dean - who answers every one. They will also appreciate the many articles on the site which are explicitly non-theoretical, giving practical advice to situations all managers face. They will also respond to the pathways on the giving them a defined route through the material.

Activists, the most likely type to be bored by traditional e-learning, will appreciate the regular updates. They will be brought back to learning by the fact that there is always something new on the site. They will particularly like the sophisticated links, both those in-text and those indicating related material, which will enable them to find their own way through the site, to follow their own interests and explore. They will see the site as a monthly experience in management, one that enables them to pick up and explore what tempts them at the time.

Reflectors, who will often find e-learning confining, will respond to the many thoughtful articles and exercises which offer alternative views, sometimes even contrary views, on management issues and concepts. They will look at all sides and make up their own minds. They will not be rushed. There is no time limit on their study or indeed on any exercise. Indeed, they will appreciate the opportunity to come back to the material whenever they choose, even re-taking exercises at will.

Theorists, who will often find e-learning a little shallow, will appreciate the involvement offered by the site in research, in debate and by the ability to contribute to the site in the form of articles, responses or critical questions. Contributions are always highly valued and the Dean makes a special effort to help potential authors to put their work into publishable form, offering advice and suggestions - editing and even re-writing where it helps. Theorists will also respond to the use of models on the site, drawing the variety of management into rational form.