Application of Accelerated Learning

This section now considers the application of effective accelerated learning. Meier (2000) asserts that in order to encourage collaborative learning it is necessary to build positive and trusting relationships within the learning group. He recommends that small group activities should be used that encourage people to share their goals and experiences. These activities should be designed to build a sense of connectedness between members of a group.

Boyd (2004) asserts that the key to application is to involve students in active learning so as to avoid monotony and engage all aspects of the brain-mind- body connection. He suggests encouraging participants to engage in proactive reading whereby they skim information to a get a general sense and then identify specific areas or questions. Finally, he argues that it is essential to encourage learners to engage regularly in reflection on what they are learning and how it may be applied.

McKeon (1995) asserts that in accelerated learning, the trainer must get involved with the trainees in the learning activities. This reinforces the point made by Simon and Price (2010) and provides a link to the theory on effective application of simulations. For example, Apel (2011) advocated the active involvement of the simulation administrator.

To incorporate effective accelerated learning into corporate development programs Rose and Nicholl (1997) proposed a six-point framework which must be addressed. The framework is termed ‘MASTER’, the components are summarised and explained below:

(i) Mind - It is necessary to establish the right state of mind. For example, establishing the benefits of the learning, a physical environment conducive to learning and novelty/excitement in activities

(ii) Acquire the information – This includes establishing facts and provision of basic data

(iii) Search out the meaning – Establishing the gaps, this includes analysis and visual frameworks

(iv) Trigger the memory – Build in a review cycle

(v) Exhibit what you know – provide an environment for sharing information

(vii) Reflect – Provide for feedback and learning summary

Meier (2000) asserts that in applying accelerated learning the key factor is to allow learners to work with each other in ‘as a real world setting as possible’. This allows learners to create their own personal meaning, knowledge and skill. Meier proposed ‘7 Principles of Rapid Design’ which are summarised below:

(i) Apply the four-phase learning cycle – Application should be built on the four phases of learning, preparation, presentation, practice, application. All four phases must be present and in proper balance

(ii) Appeal to all learning styles – This develops earlier work reviewed on learning styles, but emphasises the need to provide an ‘option rich’ environment that appeals to all learning styles

(iii) Make application activity based – Learning should include activities that participants can engage in

(iv) Create a learning community – Meier asserts that effective learning has a social base, therefore should allow for sharing knowledge and experiences

(v) Alternate between active and passive learning activities – Application should include physical (doing) activities and passive learning activities such as thinking and reflecting

(vi) Follow 30/70 rule – This means avoiding domination by the trainer. Meier advocates the balance to be 30% facilitator time and 70% learner participation time

(vii) Create flexible, open-ended sessions – Accelerated learning application should be open-ended and responsive to change. Feedback from one session should be incorporated into the next.

The final framework reviewed for the application of accelerated learning is proposed by Smith et al (2003) who advocate a four-stage accelerated learning cycle. This cycle is summarised as follows:

(i) Connect – Allow for connecting the learning to overall objectives and outcomes

(ii) Activate – Application sessions should include for input information followed by opportunities for learners to participate in activities

(iii) Demonstrate – This stage provides opportunity for leaners to demonstrate their learning through meaningful evaluation

(iv) Consolidate – The final stage addresses consolidation of learning through review of outcomes.

In conclusion, there are several common features in the three models which have been described. Rose and Nicholl, Meier and Smith et al all include aspects related to creating an effective and inclusive learning environment. This includes the use of activities which recognise learning styles. Boyd (2004) supports this and asserts that the key to effective design is to involve students in active learning. Rose and Nicholl and Meier highlight the need to provide an environment that permits sharing knowledge and experiences. Rose and Nicholl and Smith et al all confirm the need for review sessions to trigger memory and consolidate learning.

Finally, Rose and Nicholl and Meier highlight the important role of the facilitator in learner support. This point is reinforced by McKeon (1995) who asserts that the teacher must be fully involved with the trainees in learning activities. However, Rose and Nicholl add a caution in that trainers should avoid dominating the session.

4.6.7 Critical review and summary

The foregoing sections have examined accelerated learning theory and application. It is evident that accelerated learning approaches can deliver significant benefits as highlighted by Bancroft (1985), Smith and Price (2010) and Ganiron (2013). However, there remains some doubt around the full integration into adult learning settings (Imel, 2002).

Wlodkowski (2003) suggests accelerated learning techniques are criticised by conventional academics because they focus on convenience i.e. speed rather than substance and rigor. Wlodkowski states that the criticism is because there remains a view in higher education that learning is less effective when less time is devoted to it. To counter this criticism Wlodkowski cites Walberg’s synthesis (1998) that states time is necessary but not a sufficient condition for learning in itself. The point being made is that focussing on duration is irrelevant without also considering learning effectiveness. Other factors that influence learning include elements such as student capability and personal motivation. Although Wlodkowski’s observations relate primarily to accelerated learning programmes in higher education he asserts that the format can be effective across all adult learning. As an example to support the effectiveness he cites a survey conducted in 2003 which provided empirical evidence to confirm that a higher percentage of students graduate sooner from courses following an accelerated format. In conclusion, Wlodkowski claims that accelerated learning is effective but acknowledges that the extent of evidence is limited

and suggests more research is required towards accelerated learning in programme areas such as sciences, medicine and engineering. It is not clear that evidence exists connecting the benefits of accelerated learning specifically to higher-order thinking skills.

Swenson (2003) also critiques accelerated learning and suggests the term accelerated implies that there is a normal method or pace for teaching and learning. He states that this assumption is flawed because all learning is individual, the epistemology of learning is social and it is situated in the context of individual’s social lives. Thus it is not valid to argue accelerated learning on the basis of time alone. Swenson asserts that the actual issue in education relates to teaching systems in that they have been constructed to codify learning and therefore protect the traditional approach. He argues that the goal should be to create conditions under which the greatest amount of learning can take place within the shortest time, if this can be shown to be achieved this would silence sceptics of the accelerated approach.

To conclude this review the main learning and applicational constituents are summarised in Table 4.8. These are incorporated into the learning model presented in Chapter Five.

Table 4.8 – Summary of accelerated learning theory and application constituents (after Lozanov, 1978 and others cited below)

Major theorists Learning and applicational constituents Potential contribution to learning model Lozanov (1978) Bancroft (1985) McKeon (1995) Learning Environment – Should be relaxed and suggestive

For effective accelerated learning environment is important Gardner (1983) Hughes (1991) Smith (1998) Meier (2000) Ganiron (2013) Intelligences - Teaching should maximise all areas of the brain

Presentation style should be varied to engage most or all of the intelligences identified by Ganiron (2013) and others Kolb (1984)

Honey and Mumford (1986)

Fleming and Baume (2006)

Meier (2000)

Coffield et al (2004)

Learning Styles - Accelerated learning is effective through appealing to preferred learning styles of learners

Presentation style should be varied to provide for the preferred learning styles advocated by Kolb (1984) and others

Knowles (1990) Simon and Price (2010)

Engagement - Accelerated Learning achieves

engagement by recognising the components of adult learning

To support engagement learning model should provide for self-direction, connection with

experiences and be goal orientated

4.7 Game based learning