Article
Applying Kolb’s Learning Theory to Library
Instruction: An Observational Study
Chau Ha
Librarian
Saskatchewan Polytechnic
Library
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,
Canada
Email: chau.ha@saskpolytech.ca
Nina Verishagen
Librarian
Saskatchewan Polytechnic
Library
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,
Canada
Email: nina.verishagen@saskpolytech.ca
Received: 10 June 2015 Accepted: 25 Aug. 2015
2015 Ha and Verishagen. This is an Open
Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
Abstract
Objective
–
This article answers the following questions: does applying Kolb’s Learning
theory to library instruction enhance student engagement and will it improve
librarian teaching practices?
Methods – This observational study analyzed four forms of qualitative data to
examine the learning experience of first year nursing students and the teaching
experience of two Faculty Librarians. The four forms of data collected
were: (1) post-class qualitative
feedback to assess the students’ engagement; (2) library instructors’ shared
teaching observations; (3) librarian peer feedback after observing each other
teach; and (4) feedback from an instructional facilitator on the individual
librarian’s teaching skills. Two
distinct lesson plans were developed: Lesson Plan One was the first attempt at
incorporating Kolb’s theory into practice and Lesson Plan Two was a refinement
of Lesson Plan One. Teaching strategies were altered from one lesson plan to
the next based on the instructional facilitator’s feedback. The role of the
instructional facilitator was to guide the professional development of new
instructors by providing them with information and feedback on their teaching
skills.
Results
–
There were perceived improvements in student engagement and teaching practice
from Lesson Plan One to Two. Although the students’ reported experience remained
similar from one to the next, both the librarians and instructional facilitator
felt the students were more engaged and the environment seemed more
collaborative when following Lesson Plan Two. With the second lesson plan,
librarian instructors experienced a positive transformation as teachers,
becoming facilitators of learning rather than lecturers.
Conclusion
–
Incorporating Kolb’s theory into instructional practice resulted in librarian
instructors perceiving a positive effect on both instruction and on student
engagement in the teaching-learning process.
Introduction
At
our polytechnic institution, librarians are often called upon to teach learners
from a variety of programs, from trades to health sciences, to business and
technology programs. Like the majority of teaching faculty at the institution,
librarians do not have a diploma or degree in adult education. In an attempt to
address this education deficiency, our institution requires instructors in all
programs and services, including library services, complete the Faculty
Certification Program (FCP), an adult education teaching certificate, in order
to retain their positions. The courses required to complete the certificate
include adult learning theories, instructional strategies, adult development,
technology in teaching, curriculum design, evaluation of learning, and
leadership. FCP is designed to provide
new instructors with the basic knowledge and skills needed to teach adult
learners. The challenge that our
polytechnic librarians have, that other teaching faculty do not, is that we
often teach single sessions to students in a variety of programs. This means
librarians lack the opportunity to get to know students’ strengths, challenges,
and learning preferences over time. Our participation in the FCP program
prompted us to ask the question: would applying a learning theory to an
information literacy workshop increase student engagement, given that
librarians often teach single sessions to a variety of student groups?
In
the fall of 2014, as liaison librarians for a baccalaureate nursing program, we
(the authors of this article) were asked to provide four three-hour workshops
on database searching and American Psychological Association (APA) writing
style to 150 first-year nursing students. Previously, we had both taught the
workshop independently of one another but the students who met with us to ask
follow-up questions indicated inconsistencies in their understanding resulting
from two different instructors teaching the workshops. So we embarked on this
project in order to bridge this gap and to apply what we learned in FCP to our
instructional practice. Our two main objectives were: 1) to improve student
engagement with information literacy skills instruction and, 2) to grow as
professionals by perfecting our teaching skills. This paper describes the
process of applying Kolb’s learning theory to practice and our reflection of
that process towards achieving student engagement and becoming better
instructors.
We
chose Kolb’s theory because it postulates that experience is a critical aspect
of the learning process, which aligns well with library instruction as it often
involves hands-on experience in order to make sense of learning (Kolb, 2014).
According to Kolb’s theory (2014), teaching to various learning styles and
facilitating the learner’s progression through the learning cycle is necessary
in order to create new knowledge. Because this theory highlights the importance
of experimentation, reflection, and abstract conceptualization, it is suited to
information literacy instruction; research skills and information literacy are
more than just imitating keystrokes, they require creativity and critical
thinking.
Literature
Review
A literature search was conducted to
find publications on the topic of how to incorporate Kolb’s learning theory in
library instruction. Although librarians are applying learning theory to
instructional practice, using approaches such as Tiered Instructional Programs
(Bowles-Terry, 2012), Adult Learning Theory (Lange, Canuel, & Fitzgibbons,
2011) and Evaluation Methodologies (Schilling & Applegate, 2012), we were
unable to find any specific examples of the application of Kolb’s theory. Woods (2012) provides a list of suggestions on how to
consult Kolb’s cycle of learning when planning information literacy sessions by
emphasizing the use of a variety of teaching strategies to meet the preferences
of all learners. Other than Woods’ suggestions for how to incorporate
Kolb’s theory
we were unable to find literature on librarians actually applying Kolb’s
theory to their instruction. One reason for this may be that as librarians
generally conduct one-shot information literacy sessions in a wide array of
programs, the varying subject matter and timeframes make the application of
Kolb’s theory difficult. Other teaching
faculty see students daily or weekly and therefore have the ability to get to
know the students over time. These faculty have time to build on
previously-taught concepts, assess learning, and adjust their teaching
strategies and materials as needed, making it easier to apply adult learning
theory to instruction.
While little research exists on
using Kolb’s theory to guide library instruction, its use in the fields of
adult education, business, social work, and nursing has been well documented.
Kolb’s learning theory includes learning styles and his cycle of learning
(Figure 1). Since its conception in 1984, academics and practitioners in the
field of education have analyzed and implemented Kolb’s theory into their
practice. Even today, Kolb continues to inform instructional design
(Bergsteiner, Avery, & Neumann, 2010; Lisko & O’Dell, 2010; D’Amore,
James, & Mitchell, 2012; Cox, Clutter, Sergakis, & Harris, 2013).
Figure
1
Kolb’s
Experiential Learning Theory. Adapted from Experiential
learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, by D. A.
Kolb, 2014, Upper Saddle River: Pearson. Copyright 2014.
According
to Kolb & Kolb (2005), there are four types of learning styles that
instructors may encounter in every classroom:
·
Diverging
style learners are able to view experiences from multiple perspectives, are
creative, open minded, interested in people, imaginative, emotional, open to
feedback, are able to gather information, have broad interests, and enjoy group
work. These learners enjoy concrete experiences and reflective activities.
·
Assimilating
style learners are logical and are able to understand a wide range of
information. They are less interested in people and are more interested in
ideas, concepts, and theory. These learners may prefer lectures, reading,
exploring models, and having time for abstract conceptualization and
reflection.
·
Converging
style learners can put theory into practice and solve problems. These learners
may prefer technical tasks and problem solving to social or interpersonal
experiences. They learn best through abstract conceptualization and active
experimentation.
·
Accommodating
style learners learn from active experimentation and concrete experiences.
These learners rely on others for information and group work to achieve their
goals (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, pp.196-197).
For
learning and knowledge creation to occur, Kolb & Kolb (2005) contend that
instructors must create a learning space that is welcoming and respectful of
past experiences while meeting the learner’s current needs. They must also
provide a space for conversational learning, experimenting and reflecting,
which encourages intrinsic motivation and allows learners to take charge of
their own learning. In Kolb’s learning cycle, learners move through: (1)
concrete experiences, using past and present experiential learning to inform
new learning; (2) reflective observation, which leads to (3) abstract
conceptualization, which is followed by (4) active experimentation (Kolb,
2014). New knowledge is only created through active experimentation and
reflection (Lisko & O’Dell, 2010).
Determining
which learning style is characteristic of students in a particular discipline
is difficult. D’Amore et al. (2012) explored the learning styles of first-year
undergraduate nursing and midwifery students at an Australian university, and
found that the majority of the students surveyed were “divergers” (p. 507).
Although they were able to identify a dominant learning style, the authors
conceded that as people move through various stages of growth and development,
they become capable of drawing from all four learning styles. D’Amore et al. (2012) therefore concluded
that students should “not rely solely on one style” (p. 514). Cox et al. (2013) identified the learning
styles of senior students in four undergraduate health programs and found a
variety of learning styles in both the classroom and clinical setting and that
no predominant learning style emerged. The evidence therefore indicates that it
is important for educators to use a variety of teaching strategies in order to
engage learners with different learning preferences. Accordingly, creating a
lesson plan that piques the interest of all four learning styles is more
important than identifying what type of learner a student might be.
There
is a connection between the skills built through experiential learning and the
skills required to become information literate. In their study, Devasagayam,
Johns-Masten, and McCollum (2012) found that requiring students to participate
in experiential exercises that require application to reinforce learning and
are strengthened through repetition, is an effective way to teach information
literacy because it encourages critical thinking via problem solving. Clem,
Mennicke, and Beasley (2014) describe experiential learning as something
involving an experience that engages the physical body “in an effort to
holistically enhance the process of learning” (p. 491). They have found that
students learn better when the teaching approach is student-centered, when
students can take control over their learning, and when the lesson is relevant
to them. Lisko and O’Dell (2010) believe that active experimentation and
reflection are essential to transform learning into knowledge creation.
From the current literature on
Kolb’s theory being applied to nursing instruction, it can be summarized that
nursing students have a variety of learning styles, that their styles can
change over time and according to the learning environment (whether classroom
or clinical), and that nursing students prefer a variety of experiential
learning strategies. Halcomb and Peters (2009) changed the curriculum for an
undergraduate nursing course to incorporate more reflective and active
learning. They surveyed their students at the end of the course and found that
there was a positive response to the variety of interactive teaching strategies
introduced (Halcomb & Peters, 2009). Lisko and O’Dell (2010) changed a
medical-surgical nursing curriculum to meet the varied learning styles of their
students by incorporating more scenario and experiential based teaching.
Overall, their student and faculty feedback was positive and the authors felt
that their methods enabled the “development of nursing students’ critical
thinking abilities” (Lisko and O’Dell, p. 108). Crookes, Crookes, and Walsh
(2013) found that nursing students preferred various experiential and
reflective teaching techniques: technology tools, simulations, gaming,
art, problem-based learning, and narrative activities for reflection and for
linking theory to practice. Based on
a review of the literature, the application of Kolb’s theory is well-suited to
the nursing classroom.
Methods
This study answered the following
questions: Does using Kolb’s theory in library instruction enhance student
engagement and does it improve teaching practice? Four forms of
qualitative feedback were collected to determine how Kolb’s theory contributed
to the students’ engagement and how it improved our instruction: (1) we
assessed the learning experience using a student post-class qualitative
feedback form; (2) we reflected on our teaching; (3) we provided feedback to
each other after observing one another teach, and; (4) an instructional
facilitator, whose job description is to guide and support the growth of
instructional faculty, observed and provided feedback to us on our teaching
skills.
Student Feedback
The
student post-class qualitative feedback form asked students to respond to the
following questions:
1.
How
did you feel about your [research and APA skills] before the session?
2.
How
did you feel about your [research and APA skills] after the session?
3.
What
do you attribute the cause of the change in how you feel if there was a change?
4.
What
was the most impactful thing you learned?
5.
What
teaching activity was least useful and why?
The
feedback provided us with guidance and resulted in changes to the lesson plans
as well as modifications to our teaching strategies.
Librarian Reflection and Peer Feedback
In
an effort to reflect and share our teaching experiences, we met to debrief at
the end of each lesson. We discussed the following questions:
1.
How
did you feel about your teaching experience?
2.
What
were the students’ reactions to your teaching strategies?
3.
What
changes to the content or teaching strategies would you make to improve student
engagement?
These
questions encouraged us to reflect, to gain insight, and to become aware of the
impact of our teaching practices on the learners. In the debriefing sessions
after implementing the revised, second lesson plan from which we team-taught,
we provided verbal feedback regarding one another’s performance. This feedback
led to further reflection and discussion.
Faculty Facilitator Feedback
The
faculty facilitator’s knowledge, experience and expertise in guiding the
professional development of instructors provided us with further insight into
best teaching practices. She observed our teaching, made notes, and provided
verbal feedback to us after each teaching session. Her suggestions led to
further discussion and changes to our lesson plan and teaching strategies.
All four forms of qualitative
feedback were transcribed in a Microsoft Word document, which we used to change
our lesson plans, and to track our progress as teachers. Our first
attempt at incorporating Kolb’s theory into our teaching practice was delivered
to the first group of nursing students (Lesson One). Then, after processing
feedback, a second lesson plan (Lesson Two) was created to more effectively
incorporate Kolb’s theory.
Lesson One: First Attempt at Incorporating Kolb’s
Theory
We
met to create one common lesson plan: learning goals, learning content,
teaching materials, and teaching activities. For this lesson, we incorporated
Kolb’s theory based on our interpretation. We chose our teaching strategies
based on our teaching experience and our learning styles. Our teaching
strategies included asking pre-assessment questions about past experiences, a
lecture, and a demonstration followed by individual activities. We stayed at
the front of the room and came to the students who asked for help. Our
discussion questions focused on their understanding of what was lectured on or
what was demonstrated. A post-assessment form was used to assess students’
experience and the instructors debriefed afterwards to discuss our teaching
experience and our observation of students’ engagement.
We
asked the faculty facilitator to observe our teaching sessions and give us
feedback on our instructional methods. She observed that we had not
incorporated Kolb’s theory into our lesson plan effectively. She commented that
although our lesson plan had elements of Kolb’s theory, such as reflective and
experiential activities, we were not teaching to all learning styles, nor did
we facilitate moving the students through the learning cycle. She felt that our lesson plan was more
traditional than experiential. Using her suggestions, our reflection of our
practice, our feedback to each other, and the students’ feedback, we created a
new lesson plan that incorporated more experiential learning and reflection as
suggested by Kolb’s theory.
Lesson Two: Effective Incorporation of Kolb’s Theory
Kolb’s
theory was incorporated into our teaching material, activities and strategies
in the following ways:
·
We
taught this workshop as a team in order to learn from each other through
reflective observation and discussion.
·
We
facilitated the class activity, discussion and learning instead of lecturing from
the front of the room. We engaged all learners by walking around the room as we
talked and asked reflective questions of learners sitting at the front, middle
and back of the classroom.
·
We
facilitated a discussion on their past concrete experiences with research and
APA style, giving them time to reflect before beginning questioning.
·
We
facilitated discussions and provided time for a dialogue of student
observations, ideas, and opinions on their new learning.
·
Through
a learning activity on database searching, we encouraged students to search
using their usual methods and then to try a new approach to research before
coming to a conclusion. We encouraged them to use their past experiences, and
to observe and reflect, as well as actively experiment with new approaches to
search.
·
To
teach APA style, we used paired learning activities for peer-to-peer support
and peer-to-peer learning, and we encouraged them to independently search for
answers using a variety of resources.
Understanding
that we needed to facilitate their movement through the Kolb’s cycle of
learning, we used a variety of teaching strategies designed to appeal to
different learning styles:
·
For
assimilating style learners, the lecture combined with discussion questions
encouraged reflective observations.
·
For
assimilating and diverging styles, a video and a demonstration, as well as
classroom discussion and a reflective post-class survey, encouraged the sharing
of reflections and observations.
·
For
diverging and accommodating styles, paired activities allowed for active
experimentation and concrete experiences.
·
For
assimilating and converging styles, individual activities allowed for active
experimentation and concrete experiences.
Additionally,
the emphasis on reflective sharing and paired activities required that the
students remain focused and accountable.
Results and
Discussion
Students’ Reflection and Feedback
We
wanted to know if the students in Lesson One, where we first attempted to
incorporate Kolb’s theory, had different experiences from the students in
Lesson Two, where we more effectively incorporated Kolb’s theory after student
feedback and our own reflection. Students completed a post class survey meant
to facilitate reflection. From this survey we were able to gather some general
conclusions about their experiences. There were no remarkable changes in the
student feedback from Lesson One to Lesson Two. The majority of students in
both sessions responded that: (1) they felt a positive change in their level of
confidence after our teaching sessions; (2) they attributed the change to what
they learned in the session; and (3) they found the session to be valuable and
useful, with a few students finding the content to be confusing at times. Some
suggestions for changes from both student groups included: increase the length
of the session, decrease the length of the session, incorporate a break, and
slow the pace of the lesson. These results may indicate that different students
had different needs and that different aspects of our teaching appealed to each
type of learner in each session regardless of teaching Kolb-style or not.
The
student survey was not designed to evaluate our teaching effectiveness. It was
meant to encourage student reflection on their learning experience as reflective
observation is a key component of Kolb’s theory (Kolb, 2014). This activity
allowed learners to reflect on what they had learned, what they did not
understand, and prompted them to take control of their learning by seeking
answers or librarian support.
Both
librarians and the instructional facilitator perceived a change in student
engagement between Lessons One and Two. We collectively observed the students
to be more engaged when Kolb’s theory was more effectively incorporated into
the lesson. The students appeared more focused on their learning activities,
and more involved in the paired and classroom discussions and group work, and
there was more time allotted for reflection and active experimentation. We
perceived them to be less distracted and more actively involved in all aspects
of learning.
Facilitating Students’ Movement Through Kolb’s Cycle
of Learning
Kolb’s
theory is about facilitating learning by moving learners through each stage of the
learning cycle so that they may be able to understand and transform their
learning into new knowledge (Kolb, 2014). Knowledge creation is facilitated if
learners are able to resolve the cognitive dissonance between their previous
learning experience with new learning, between concrete experience and abstract
conceptualization as well as between reflective observation and active
experimentation (Kolb, 2014). The following section provides an example of how
we facilitated students’ movement through the learning cycle in the database
searching portion of the class.
Concrete
Experience
At
this stage, learners rely on their concrete experiences as they approach a
task, using knowledge and skills based on both past and present experiential
learning. We gave the students time to demonstrate their current searching
skills on a research question related to their course assignment. Most students
used internet search engines, some used Google Scholar, and a few used
databases. Although some were successful at finding journal articles, none
searched in a systematic manner.
Reflective
Observation
Reflective
observation is about critically analyzing the learning and considering the
impact of what has been learned. First, we facilitated a reflective
conversation in which they shared their approaches to finding journal articles.
We taught the students how to systematically search by introducing them to the
following skills: creating a search strategy, using subject terms and keywords,
choosing the appropriate databases, using limiters, and applying the same
search strategy across various databases. To encourage reflective observation,
we provided time to conduct searches using both the new method they had just
learned and their previous methods. The students compared their results, and
then shared their findings with a peer, then the class. This provided another
concrete experience on systematic searching and facilitated another reflective
discussion on their new experience.
Abstract
Conceptualization
At
this stage, learners critically analyze the new skills and think about how it
applies to them accomplishing a task. In order to facilitate this internal,
personal, and individualized cognitive process, we asked the students to work
with a peer to create a new a search strategy in order to find peer reviewed
journal articles for their research question. This activity encouraged them to
collaboratively work through a problem and think critically about their past
and new learning experiences in order to create an individualized approach to
systematic searching. It was our hope that they would synthesize their original
method with ours to complete this search.
Active
Experimentation
At
this stage, learners experiment with what they have learned and adapt it to
their individual style in order to accomplish a task. We encouraged the
students to adapt what we taught them and merge it with any previously
successful searching strategies as they attempted to apply the new skills to
their new search. We acknowledged there are different ways to search
systematically and we encouraged students to experiment in order to find what
will work best for them in the future.
Librarian Experience: Reflection and Feedback
The
general themes that arose from our reflection and feedback sessions with each
other and with the faculty facilitator are highlighted in Table 1.
Our
reflective practice, inspired by applying Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory
to library instruction, has been essential to our growth and development as
adult educators. Self-reflection and soliciting feedback from multiple sources
encouraged insight and awareness of the effects of our teaching styles. Through
this process we learned the value of making time to debrief with each other in
order to facilitate our instructional development. We learned to value our
differences while challenging ourselves to try new strategies in an effort to
improve student engagement with information literacy skills.
Table
1
Self
Reflection and Feedback Session
|
Self-Reflection |
Peer Feedback |
Faculty Facilitator Feedback |
Lesson One |
On our teaching: · Well organized · Good time management · Lesson was relevant and applicable to
students – the lesson aligned with a research assignment the students were
expected to complete for their nursing course · Overall, satisfied with lesson plan and
teaching strategies On student
engagement: · The students were focused on learning
activities. · Most students participated in activities. |
We discussed: · the pros and cons of our different communication
styles, as they had an effect on our delivery of the lesson plan. · the pros and cons of the content we
emphasized during the session (e.g., APA references vs. APA citations might
receive more emphasis depending on the teacher). |
On our teaching: · Teaching styles did not appeal to all types
of learners. · We stood at the front of the room and
lectured. · Our questioning did not encourage reflection
and critical thinking from the students. On student
engagement: · Low engagement. Many students were not
engaged in learning, but were searching other websites. |
Lesson Two |
On our teaching: · Initially, we were reluctant to try new
teaching strategies. · We felt a time pressure in modifying the
lesson by applying Kolb’s theory. · Over time we felt we had expanded our
knowledge with the new teaching strategies. · We felt empowered by the new strategies. · We perceived the lesson to have been a
success. · The lesson was relevant because it was tied
to a course assignment. On student engagement: · Greater student discussion, collaboration
and focus on their learning activities |
We discussed · Recognition of our different teaching
styles. · Appreciation for one another’s strengths as
teachers. We noted: · We had become more learner-centered and less
teacher-centered. We would ask ourselves questions like what is the impact of
our actions on the learners? We focused less on how we liked to teach and how
we liked learn. · We had become facilitators of learning instead
of lecturers. · We learned how to effectively give and
receive feedback. |
On our teaching: · A variety of teaching styles were used to
meet the needs of various learners. · We moved around the classroom engaging
learners from all corners. · The activities were more reflective,
stimulating critical thinking. On student
engagement: · High engagement. All students participated
in the activities rather than visiting other websites. |
Librarian Experience: Kolb’s Cycle of Learning
For
our professional development, we used Kolb’s theory to process what we had
learned about library instruction when we used his theory to guide teaching
practice. We reflected on our learning style and teaching strategies as we
progressed through Kolb’s cycle of learning in order to gain insight into our
teaching practice. The following section outlines our movement, as instructors,
through Kolb’s cycle of learning.
Concrete
Experimentation
In
Lesson One, we created content, teaching activities, and teaching strategies
based on our past learning and teaching experiences and preferences. Student
feedback was generally positive and our perception of the lesson was that it
was organized and well managed. The students appeared engaged in the learning
activities as they all completed the assigned tasks. We later realized that we
were looking for strengths in our practice that validated our bias that we were
effective instructors. The objective feedback from the instructional
facilitator, an experienced instructor of adult education who observed our
teaching, provided us with information that challenged our thinking and our
practice.
The
instructional facilitator’s feedback on Lesson One, our first attempt at
incorporating Kolb’s theory, was as follows:
·
During
the lecture some students were engaging in their own conversation or using the
computer for other purposes.
·
The
students appeared bored and distracted at times, especially those students
sitting at the back of the room.
·
We
stood at the front of the room and mostly engaged with learners at the front.
We did not engage learners from all areas of the classroom.
·
We
asked closed ended questions about comprehension but did not wait for
responses.
·
We
did not ensure student accountability for their learning activity, nor did we
evaluate their search queries or their APA exercise.
The
instructional facilitator recommended the following changes be made in order to
more effectively incorporate Kolb’s experiential theory:
·
When
lecturing, walk around the room to get the attention of learners from all
corners of the classroom.
·
Have
paired activities for peer-to-peer learning and support as well as individual
activities for those learners who prefer to work on their own.
·
Encourage
discussion and reflection by asking reflective questions and giving students
time to answer.
·
Ensure
students are engaged by randomly asking reflective questions to students in all
corners of the classroom.
·
Ensure
students are accountable for their learning by asking them to show you how they
search or how they apply APA.
·
Give
students time to experiment and compare their past search practices with the
new approaches that have been introduced.
Reflective observation
Transforming the
lesson
We
compared the feedback from the instructional facilitator to our observations of
the students with our first attempt at incorporating Kolb’s theory. From our
point of view, the students appeared engaged and we questioned the need for
change. We were reluctant to incorporate the changes due to time constraints.
Creating an experiential lesson plan would require the addition of new
activities for reflection, abstract conceptualization, and active
experimentation. All of these additions are time-consuming and we questioned
the feasibility of incorporating Kolb’s theory into practice. Ultimately, we
decided to experiment with the suggestions and assess the student’s engagement
when Kolb’s theory was applied properly.
Our Learning
Styles
Another
insight we had was: as teachers, our learning styles affect our teaching
styles. In our previous experiences of teaching this class, we focused on
content, teaching activities, and teaching strategies that were based on what
we valued, our past experiences as learners and instructors, our learning style
preferences, and what we learned in our Master’s of Library and Information
Studies and FCP. Completing Kolb’s learning style inventory revealed that one
of us favors a converging learning style, while the other is a combination diverging
and assimilating style learner. Converging style learners tend to have a
natural instruction style, which focuses on the practical application of
searching skills which can be applied to the student’s assignment, whereas the
assimilating/diverging learner favors reflecting in a structured way through
organized activities such as lectures, readings and discussions in order to
explore new ideas and skills (Kolb, 2007). Teaching strategies such as
brainstorming sessions and using guided logical conversations to find solutions
to problems may appeal to assimilating/diverging learners.
These
differences in our learning styles as instructors became evident throughout the
project. At the completion of each lesson, we would often view different
learning activities as having been the “most impactful” in cultivating student
engagement and we would often disagree on strategies for moving forward. Upon
reflection, we found strengths in these differences that resulted in teaching
approaches neither of us had considered before.
We came to realize, as Kolb states, “ideas are not fixed and immutable
elements of thought but are formed and reformed through experience” (Kolb,
2014, p. 36).
Abstract conceptualization
Using
Kolb’s theory in library instruction presented some challenges in terms of the
time required to move students through the learning cycle. To add to this, we
understood some of the criticisms of Kolb’s learning style and cycle of
learning. Coffield, Moseley, Hall, and Ecclestone (2004) did a systematic
review of various learning styles models with the objective of evaluating the
validity and reliability of the theories, claims, and applications of these
models. Coffield et al. (2004) found the reliability and validity of the
learning style inventory and learning cycle to be questionable. For example,
matching teaching style with learning style does not improve academic
achievement (Coffield et al., 2004). Despite this, the value of using Kolb’s
theory to guide library instruction is that it provides a theoretical framework
to guide practice to use past experiences in present teaching, and to provide
time for reflection and abstract conceptualization (critical thinking) as well
as time for active experimentation (testing ideas and theories). It is also learner-centered
and reminds instructors to teach to a variety of learning styles in the
classroom.
Active experimentation
We
decided to experiment with team teaching for Lesson Two. Having two instructors in the room enabled us
to use each other’s strengths and expose the students to two different styles
of teaching, thereby appealing to more learning styles in the classroom. Two
librarians in the classroom enabled us to monitor students’ completion of tasks
and to ask them to show us how they applied what they learned to the learning
activities. We and the faculty facilitator observed that the students in Lesson
Two appeared more engaged in learning activities, reflection, and discussion.
Student feedback was consistently positive in both Lesson One and Lesson Two.
Limitations and
Next Steps
The
amount of time required to implement Kolb’s theory was an issue. Because the
delivery of certain content was required, there was insufficient time to incorporate
the reflection and abstract conceptualization required for a true experience of
Kolb’s cycle of learning. That we saw the students only once also limited our
opportunities for follow-up on student engagement, and subsequent adjustment of
our teaching strategies. Another limitation is that we did not randomly assign
students to a control group, taught without applying Kolb’s theory, and an
experimental group, taught applying Kolb’s theory, to measure any differences
in student satisfaction or achievement of learning outcomes. The results
observed during this process were based on our reflection and our perception of
our performance and the impact on student engagement. There was no objective
measurement of student engagement or teaching effectiveness.
This
paper focused on our reflective practice and perceptions of the
teaching-learning process as we incorporated Kolb’s theory into library
instructional practice. Future researchers may want to focus on gathering
empirical data in order to measure student satisfaction with information
literacy skills instruction when librarians incorporate various learning
theories into their teaching practice. Interested researchers may also want to
compare the effectiveness of using Kolb’s theory on student learning outcomes
and comparing that to when librarians use another adult learning theory to
guide teaching practice.
Conclusion
In
this observational study we incorporated adult learning theory into two
distinct lesson plans, delivered to two groups of students from the same
program, completing the same assignment.
Four types of qualitative feedback appeared to affirm that there were
improvements in student engagement from Lesson One to Lesson Two. It appeared
that the effective incorporation of Kolb’s theory resulted in greater student
engagement and a more collaborative classroom environment. Additionally, we
experienced a transformation as teachers. We became more thoughtful,
deliberate, and aware of our teaching purpose and goals and their potential effect
on student engagement. The incorporation of multiple teaching strategies that
address a variety of learning styles enabled us to facilitate the students
moving through the cycle of learning in order for knowledge creation to occur.
Applying theory to practice increased our knowledge of adult learning theory
and teaching practice, challenged our beliefs that we were already effective
instructors, and motivated us to try new strategies that we had not considered,
such as team teaching and being observed by a peer and a faculty facilitator.
This study motivated us to change our practice to enhance student engagement
and to develop into more effective information literacy instructors.
References
Bergsteiner, H.,
Avery, G. C., & Neumann, R. (2010). Kolb's experiential learning model:
Critique from a modeling perspective. Studies in Continuing
Education, 32(1), 29-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01580370903534355
Bowles-Terry, M.
(2012). Library instruction and academic success: A mixed-methods assessment of
a library instruction program. Evidence Based Library & Information
Practice, 7(1), 82-95. Retrieved from http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/12373/13256
Clem, J.M.,
Mennicke, A.M., & Beasley, C. (2014). Development and validation of the
experiential learning survey. Journal of
Social Work Education, 50(3), 490-506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2014.917900
Coffield, F.,
Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning
styles? What research has to say to practice. Retrieved from http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/files/LSRC_LearningStyles.pdf
Cox, L.,
Clutter, J., Sergakis, G., & Harris, L. (2013). Learning style of
undergraduate allied health students: Clinical versus classroom. Journal
of Allied Health, 42(4), 223-228. Retrieved from http://www.asahp.org/publications/journal-of-allied-health/
Crookes, K.,
Crookes, P. A., & Walsh, K. (2013). Meaningful and engaging teaching
techniques for student nurses: A literature review. Nurse Education in
Practice, 13(4), 239-243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2013.04.008
D'Amore, A.,
James, S., & Mitchell, E. K. (2012). Learning styles of first-year
undergraduate nursing and midwifery students: A cross-sectional survey
utilizing the Kolb Learning Style Inventory. Nurse Education Today, 32(5),
506-515. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2011.08.001
Devasagayam, R.,
Johns-Masten, K., & McCollum, J. (2012). Linking information literacy,
experiential learning, and student characteristics: pedagogical possibilities
in business education. Academy of Educational Leadership
Journal, 16(4), 1-18. Retrieved from http://www.alliedacademies.org/academy-of-educational-leadership-journal/
Halcomb, E.,
& Peters, K. (2009). Nursing student feedback on undergraduate research
education: implications for teaching and learning. Contemporary Nurse: A
Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession, 33(1), 59-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.5172/conu.33.1.59
Kolb, A.Y &
Kolb, D.A (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: enhancing experiential
learning in higher education. Academy of
Management Learning and Education, 4(2), 193-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566
Kolb, D.A.
(2014). Experiential learning: Experience
as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle
River: Pearson.
Lange, J.,
Canuel, R., & Fitzgibbons, M. (2011). Tailoring information literacy
instruction and library services for continuing education. Journal of Information Literacy 5(2), 66-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.11645/5.2.1606
Lisko, S.A.
& O’Dell, V. (2010). Integration of theory and practice: Experiential
learning theory and nursing education. Nursing Education Perspectives 31(2),
106-108. Retrieved from http://www.nln.org/newsroom/newsletters-and-journal/nursing-education-perspectives-journal
Schilling, K.,
& Applegate, R. (2012). Best methods for evaluating educational impact: a
comparison of the efficacy of commonly used measures of library
instruction. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 100(4),
258-269. http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.100.4.007
Woods, H. B.
(2012). Know your RO from your AE? Learning styles in practice. Health Information & Libraries Journal,
29(2), 172-176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2012.00983.x